Which is more important, Science or religion? [continued]

This thread is closed for posting.

page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 Next » 104 total items

Cancel

This tread is a continuation of the original thread:
Which is more important, Science or religion?


merged: 11-16-2008 ~ 06:40am
ah, well science or religion?

Science! religion does nothing more than hinder progress and cloud truth and mar beauty.

Religion claims to bring absolute truth, but what evidence does it present? NOTHING. instead it encourages faith, that is, belief without evidence! throws rationality right out of the window. It accuses science of not having all the answers, well this is true, for now. science
is a dynamic process constantly improving itself thats the beauty of the scientific method and just because science does not have all the answers does not make religion a better answer. why? BECAUSE RELIGION IS NOT BASED ON RATIONAL ARGUMENTS!
ok so thats why it clouds truth

why it hinders progress:
Religion encourages faith. faith is belief without resonable evidence. Which means u can believe in pretty much anything if u have 'faith'. This mindset acts against the scientific, rational view point.
Look at our world, everything we do, everything we interact with has a technological, scientific component to it. By allowing this irrationality of faith to continue we are turning our backs on the scientific method(our best way to get to truth) and instead we embrace a system that almost destroyed many years worth of progress in the past(great example is the christian dark ages).

Religion teaches disgusting morals(well specifically the abrahamic religions) eg advocate slavery. If a person is religions and believes that such a set of abhorrent morals are set by god, he or she does not have the right to question his divine authority. It may result in possibly good people doing evil things. What did the muslim terrorists kill in the name of allah, the christians during the crusades and inquisition etc tortured and killed in the name of god and these are supposedly religions of good morals.

And now the moderately religious fool usually rebuts: AH BUT THOSE ARE ONLY EXTREMISTS! I DONT DO ANY OF THAT STUFF!

and this is my rebuttal: this is religious hypocrisy, however at least its good hypocrisy, why dont you kill ppl who work on the sabbath anymore? cause its a dickheadish thing todo. But its mentioned in the old testiment, why dont you listen to the old testiment anymore? BECAUSE ITS a dickheadish thing to do! the new testiment is truely an improvement(though its still very bs) but what caused that improvement? People did! people are picking and choosing parts of the bible to follow! they pick the parts that fit with their set of morals and dont follow parts that are dickheadful:P what does this show? this shows that we do not get our morals from religion at all!

btw actual words of binladen:
"you are the worst civilization witnessed by the history of mankind: You are the nation who, rather than ruling by the Shariah of Allah in its Constitution and Laws, choose to invent your own laws as you will and desire. You separate religion from your policies, contradicting the pure nature which affirms Absolute Authority to the Lord and your Creator."...you can see the religious motives all through it!

oh and tehre is the whole american faith healers which exploit the ignorant and the guillible. They trick ppl into discarding neccessary medical treatments and tell them to embrace faith has treatment! the do this while taking heaps and heaps of money from them

bleargh im tired now:P it soo much easier to destroy religion vocally face to face!

  • Nov 16, 2008

ttwen

ttwen

somebody

Cancel

Quote by fmp111
Religion claims to bring absolute truth, but what evidence does it present? NOTHING. instead it encourages faith, that is, belief without evidence! throws rationality right out of the window.

for Christianity, proof mostly comes out from the Bible.

Quote:
It accuses science of not having all the answers, well this is true, for now. science
is a dynamic process constantly improving itself thats the beauty of the scientific method and just because science does not have all the answers does not make religion a better answer. why? BECAUSE RELIGION IS NOT BASED ON RATIONAL ARGUMENTS!
ok so thats why it clouds truth

i suppose by making this statement you are saying you heard our current Pope is making claims that science are actually crap? who told you science is accused? since when science is accused? well unless you are still living in the Renaissance. or maybe you have the exact mind of Renaissance philosophical thinkers who oppose religion. (reading too much Descartes?)
all i can say about them is, thinkers are well, thinkers and do nothing more than think.

Quote:
why it hinders progress:
Religion encourages faith. faith is belief without resonable evidence. Which means u can believe in pretty much anything if u have 'faith'. This mindset acts against the scientific, rational view point.

do you read Science magazine? in case you don't, let me tell you that the scientists who post articles there are happy when their experiment gone anomaly. and of course, they take the course to do new hypothesis to confirm the phenomena. a narrow-minded scientist is a failed scientist.

Quote:
Look at our world, everything we do, everything we interact with has a technological, scientific component to it. By allowing this irrationality of faith to continue we are turning our backs on the scientific method(our best way to get to truth) and instead we embrace a system that almost destroyed many years worth of progress in the past(great example is the christian dark ages).

i guess the Bush Administration declared war on Iraq and Afghanistan in the name of God and not on terrorism and WMDs?

Quote:
Religion teaches disgusting morals(well specifically the abrahamic religions) eg advocate slavery. If a person is religions and believes that such a set of abhorrent morals are set by god, he or she does not have the right to question his divine authority. It may result in possibly good people doing evil things. What did the muslim terrorists kill in the name of allah, the christians during the crusades and inquisition etc tortured and killed in the name of god and these are supposedly religions of good morals.

if you bother to read the Old Testament (and your abrahamic religion), you will find God requires the Israelite to release their servants after years of serving, and the servant can choose to go as a free man or stay in service of the master. they too, have to treat their servants nicely and justly and so on. the part on this is quite long and heavy, so i suppose nobody would read it if i quote them all out. :/

Quote:
And now the moderately religious fool usually rebuts: AH BUT THOSE ARE ONLY EXTREMISTS! I DONT DO ANY OF THAT STUFF!

interesting thinking.


Quote:
and this is my rebuttal: this is religious hypocrisy, however at least its good hypocrisy, why dont you kill ppl who work on the sabbath anymore? cause its a dickheadish thing todo. But its mentioned in the old testiment, why dont you listen to the old testiment anymore? BECAUSE ITS a dickheadish thing to do! the new testiment is truely an improvement(though its still very bs) but what caused that improvement? People did! people are picking and choosing parts of the bible to follow! they pick the parts that fit with their set of morals and dont follow parts that are dickheadful:P what does this show? this shows that we do not get our morals from religion at all!

this is just another typical statement made by narrow-minded people who hate religion. it's actually quite amusing.

Quote:
btw actual words of binladen:
"you are the worst civilization witnessed by the history of mankind: You are the nation who, rather than ruling by the Shariah of Allah in its Constitution and Laws, choose to invent your own laws as you will and desire. You separate religion from your policies, contradicting the pure nature which affirms Absolute Authority to the Lord and your Creator."...you can see the religious motives all through it!

words of bin laden. but is it word of their Allah? but on mentioning Syariah, yes if every nation would follow religious laws, people would have few freedom, but there would be less crimes cases etc etc as religious laws are VERY strict.

Quote:
oh and tehre is the whole american faith healers which exploit the ignorant and the guillible. They trick ppl into discarding neccessary medical treatments and tell them to embrace faith has treatment! the do this while taking heaps and heaps of money from them

this sounds like Scientology. i don't know about Americans but from my community, we do get the sick to the hospital, getting them proper treatment, as well as praying for their welfare.

Cancel

^^crude language but couldn't agree more.
P.S. repost of a repost of a repost.
I'll be leaving now, but if you wish to discuss this further, take any of my other posts in this forum and copy/paste them to this thread.

  • Nov 17, 2008
Cancel

"for Christianity, proof mostly comes out from the Bible."

And what rational evidence is presented in the bible?


"i suppose by making this statement you are saying you heard our current Pope is making claims that science are actually crap? who told you science is accused? since when science is accused? well unless you are still living in the Renaissance. or maybe you have the exact mind of Renaissance philosophical thinkers who oppose religion. (reading too much Descartes?) all i can say about them is, thinkers are well, thinkers and do nothing more than think."

Ah so science isn

  • Nov 17, 2008

ttwen

ttwen

somebody

Cancel

there's this one thing i want to point out

Quote:
Unrelated tangent: what is wrong with renaissance thinkers? In fact, whatâ?s wrong with thinking? Descartes was a brilliant man.


there's nothing wrong with renaissance thinkers. it's you who is still living in the renaissance age.


and, if you did not notice already, let me make this clear to you, i rebutted NONE of your statements. i am simply trying point out how flawed your "rational" mind is, and how limited your knowledge is due to your close mindedness. since you are a living renaissance person, i'm going to talk renaissance to you: close-minded people(during renaissance) are usually pointed at religious people who seriously can't accept science that contradicts church science. but never mind, i failed to make you realize. and you can continue to be rude just to keep me and possibly other members amused (since i see this as nothing more than a hate thread).

like XRW175P6MQ4 said, this has been debated many times, i suggest you look around this sub-forum, and read carefully the serious posts. as XRW175P6MQ4 suggested, i might as well do that too.

Cancel

"since you are a living renaissance person, i'm going to talk renaissance to you: close-minded people(during renaissance) are usually pointed at religious people who seriously can't accept science that contradicts church science."

please rephrase

merged: 11-17-2008 ~ 12:58pm
Btw...And how do you intend to point out the flaw of rational thinking when you do not rebut any arguments but instead just throw in useless logical fallacies? You have an assertion but that’s all!
And as for being rude to you, i see no reason to respect one who is equally as rude to me.
Yes i have been very hostile to religion, but with good reason. My hostility is not derived from narrow minded blind hate.

  • Nov 17, 2008

priincess

priincess

?doing fun

Cancel

Quote: religious people who seriously can't accept science that contradicts church science."

how religious people cant accept science if God creates science. let me tell you that scientists have used Bible as one of their source since long time ago.

Quote: Btw...And how do you intend to point out the flaw of rational thinking when you do not rebut any arguments but instead just throw in useless logical fallacies?

what we mean with logic something that we ourselves can accept in our mind. people create 'logic'. what do you think useless isnt the same as what he/she thinks

Signature
	Image

onyhow

Survivor...

Cancel

Someone decide to continue the thread? WOW!

Quote: this sounds like Scientology. i don't know about Americans but from my community, we do get the sick to the hospital, getting them proper treatment, as well as praying for their welfare.

Well, Scientology, sure...but it doesn't mean that it doesn't happen to other religions...Christianity in particular that I've heard news of failed faith healing that leads to court...

Quote: what we mean with logic something that we ourselves can accept in our mind. people create 'logic'. what do you think useless isnt the same as what he/she thinks

But that's NOT what logic means...if it's what you can accept by heart, then it's NOT logic...

  • Nov 17, 2008

ttwen

ttwen

somebody

Cancel

Quote by fmp111
Btw...And how do you intend to point out the flaw of rational thinking when you do not rebut any arguments but instead just throw in useless logical fallacies? You have an assertion but that

Cancel

----------------------------

Quote by ttwen i am not rude to you, but i am quite straightforward. i can assure you that, i am not saying you are rude to me either; but you are rude to religion.

I am rude to religion? Well if you count hostile criticism of its flaws rude then yes I am. Why should we respect anything that has immense impacts upon society ( a lot of which is negative) and is based upon irrational, out dated reasoning?
If I were to criticise politics or philosophy or economics in the same way it wouldn

  • Nov 18, 2008

ttwen

ttwen

somebody

Cancel

Quote by fmp111
I am rude to religion? Well if you count hostile criticism of its flaws rude then yes I am. Why should we respect anything that has immense impacts upon society ( a lot of which is negative) and is based upon irrational, out dated reasoning?
If I were to criticise politics or philosophy or economics in the same way it wouldn

Cancel

Quote by ttwenwell, at least you admitted. but anyway you keep on saying "irrational" and "illogical", and i'm sure nobody here knows what you really mean what is irrational to you, and what is illogical to you. care to explain?

And i keep explaining what i mean by irrational....but ill repeat myself again.... Why is religion irrational? Because religion in essence centers around faith. Faith by definition is belief without need of evidence. It is this belief without evidence that is irrational. Irrational thinking (in short) is thinking that is not logically sound.

Back to religion, this irrational thinking (faith) is dangerous because if you can believe one thing without evidence, what is stopping you from believing in a second thing without evidence?

Quote by ttwen i do think you missed out the words "commercial research" and "government research"? commercial/government research both has a common point. they want this, and want that, which becomes your hypothesis. and they hire you to do what they want. as for independent research (usually for universities), where you research is not as pressurized and you can ask for more funds (or use your own) to fund your research, then yes you can be happy about the anomaly. i looked into your profile, and if your age is correct, you should be in high school. your high school experiments are easy and predictable and so are your empirical data, since those have been confirmed so many times. so wait until you get to a higher level of education (assuming you are going into science course of study in university) to understand these. that is all i am going to talk about science experiments. say whatever you want now, agree or disagree, it's up to you. but you will know what i mean when you are older.

Whether its commercial research or government research it does not matter. "they want this, and want that, which becomes your hypothesis. and they hire you to do what they want." It may be true that the institution can decide what your hypothesis will be, but that in no way will affect the outcome of the empirical data once experimentation is done.

Again let me give you an example, lets say you were hired by a smoking company that wanted your hypothesis to be "Prolonged smoking does not cause damage to lungs" that is a perfectly fine hypothesis. However, when experimentation is done, the results will always suggest that smoking will cause harm, regardless of the hypothesis.

Now in regards to my level of education, that is correct i am in high school, do not assume that i would be so naive as to think that all science experiments are simple and easy. Whether evidence is easy and predictable or evidence is complex does not matter, if the conclusion is not based upon the way the evidence points then the conclusion is invalid. I accept that for one given piece of evidence, there can be many valid conclusions, as long as they do not go against the evidence they are still valid. Further experimentation will allow new empirical data which can then be used to refine one's conclusions.

My age and level of education is irrelevant to this.

Quote by ttwenyes, at least you too, agree that religion are often misused for acts of men. but hey, look around more carefully, humans misuse almost anything for their own greed. therefore we have corruption everywhere, religion, government, organizations, business, anything, even in research (a more famous case would be the stem cell scandal if i remember correctly).

It is true that many things are misused for greed etc, but you see religion is one of the main tools The thing is that religion and the gods inherent to them, are just constructs of human society and thus subject to its same flaws (an example would be in one of my previous posts, where the bible clearly advocated mass violence).

The scientific method on the other hand is utterly neutral and does not contain the same human flaws of greed, hate etc So where religion and science are tools of human society, religion is incredibly more frequently misused as it is inherently flawed (faith and human vices) where as science is essentially as neutral and objective as possible within the physical world.

You can find examples where war is fought in the name of religion and conflicting religions, conflicting political ideology etc but you never see a war that is fought over whether light is a particle or a wave. hahah

Quote by ttwenthere is nothing to defend or attack actually, as i mentioned how narrow-mindedness is your real enemy and not religion. and i am just using history as an example. if you want another example of a more serious case of narrow-mindedness, i suggest you look into Manchu Empire of China after it's close door policy, or more this modern day, look into North Korea.

I still don't understand how a rejection of religion and faith is narrow minded. However i do agree that narrow-mindedness is very dangerous, and faith is in particular, very narrow minded.

Quote by ttwen
i think she means mostly archeologists and historians.

Erm those disciplines don't even adhere to the scientific method......

  • Nov 18, 2008

ttwen

ttwen

somebody

Cancel

Quote by fmp111
Back to religion, this irrational thinking (faith) is dangerous because if you can believe one thing without evidence, what is stopping you from believing in a second thing without evidence?

there are a lot of thing you won't find ever evidence, especially in the field of science. that is why some theory remain as theory (forever).

Quote:
Whether its commercial research or government research it does not matter. "they want this, and want that, which becomes your hypothesis. and they hire you to do what they want." It may be true that the institution can decide what your hypothesis will be, but that in no way will affect the outcome of the empirical data once experimentation is done.

Again let me give you an example, lets say you were hired by a smoking company that wanted your hypothesis to be "Prolonged smoking does not cause damage to lungs" that is a perfectly fine hypothesis. However, when experimentation is done, the results will always suggest that smoking will cause harm, regardless of the hypothesis.

dude, i'm referring to faith in science. i am not talking about results.

Quote:
My age and level of education is irrelevant to this.

of course it doesn't, but experience does. i am saying that you are not experienced enough to understand. but whatever...

Quote by ttwen
It is true that many things are misused for greed etc, but you see religion is one of the main tools The thing is that religion and the gods inherent to them, are just constructs of human society and thus subject to its same flaws (an example would be in one of my previous posts, where the bible clearly advocated mass violence).

if you say Bible teaches mass violence, do you see any Christian declaring a crusade today? or maybe take up suicide bombing in the name of God? of course, even if we don't talk about Christianity, what about Buddhism(if u consider that religion)? Buddhist followers are kind and forgiving, their karma concept is scary enough. i don't see Buddhism is teaching the wrong thing to humans.

Quote:
The scientific method on the other hand is utterly neutral and does not contain the same human flaws of greed, hate etc So where religion and science are tools of human society, religion is incredibly more frequently misused as it is inherently flawed (faith and human vices) where as science is essentially as neutral and objective as possible within the physical world.

science is less misused? you just heard less, because scandals are not often reported as religion does.

Quote:
You can find examples where war is fought in the name of religion and conflicting religions, conflicting political ideology etc but you never see a war that is fought over whether light is a particle or a wave. hahah

but hey, wars are fought using science.

Quote:
I still don't understand how a rejection of religion and faith is narrow minded. However i do agree that narrow-mindedness is very dangerous, and faith is in particular, very narrow minded.


hmm.. narrow minded would be like blinded by own philosophy/beliefs. everything else is absolutely wrong except what the person believes. and on top of that, he wouldn't reason with different idea because of his stubbornness, or something like that.

Quote:
Erm those disciplines don't even adhere to the scientific method......

i'm sure you are not familiar with archeological methods by referring to ancient texts (which is very common). but i'm not going into that.

you do give me the idea that you think religious people shut themselves out of the world, ignoring/condemning or ignorance to science.

maybe many of you would be interested in Pascal Boyers. his latest article is published in Nature Magazine:

http://artsci.wustl.edu/~pboyer/PBoyerHomeSite/articles.html

beyondmeasure

From the mind comes the query.

Cancel

there are a lot of thing you won't find ever evidence, especially in the field of science. that is why some theory remain as theory (forever).

Give 'em all.

if you say Bible teaches mass violence, do you see any Christian declaring a crusade today? or maybe take up suicide bombing in the name of God? of course, even if we don't talk about Christianity, what about Buddhism(if u consider that religion)? Buddhist followers are kind and forgiving, their karma concept is scary enough. i don't see Buddhism is teaching the wrong thing to humans.

Not crusades, no, not today - something worse.

+ points to televangelists, Vatican's anti-contraceptive stance, Christianity's anti-homosexual stance (in general) +

but hey, wars are fought using science.

And the causes are mainly religious.

  • Nov 20, 2008

Schlander

Schlander

The StealthHawk

Cancel

I believe both are equally important and cant be compared to each other on a level of importance as they both serve different functions in society even though at times the cross each other.

Religion is a explanation of the unknown concepts of morality and after life, as far as I'm concerned science hasn't made huge strives in theories to explain either other then your "dead"

Science is mainly used to understand the realm of the physical world around us, (behavioural, why physical substance exists (matter) and what manipulates matter for action (energy)

Both are important not everyone needs it pushed on them they need to discover it themselves if they wish to believe in one sect or another, but also note some important religious philosophies have played important roles in development of reasoning systems like Aristotelian logic which divides the world into the world of ideas, and the world of the physical. A lot of Chinese philosophy was religious in origin but helped usher in a broader understanding of nature which lead to sciences.


Conclusion is one is not greater then the other, both are subject to great conflict & tension among mankind. The elimitation of either wouldn't help mankind as there are other sources of war and conflict, like the limited resources of man and political philosophies which can be tied to both subjects discussed above. How we interpret morals and views of philosophy is very subjective, and there isn't a correct answer that mankind can establish. No universal morals, no universal right answer. I believe what I believe because thats how i see it, doesn't mean others see it the same way and we all must respect each others right to view things how we view them.

Life is just the act of progressing, if you don't advance you don't live.

  • Nov 20, 2008

ttwen

ttwen

somebody

Cancel

Quote by beyondmeasure
Give 'em all.


you know that yourself.

- points to televangelists,
i don't know about that, and i don't have that here, since my country's official religion stance is Islam. therefore, i can't comment about that.

- Vatican's anti-contraceptive stance
isn't being natural good?

- Christianity's anti-homosexual stance (in general)
yes, God created women to accompany men, why would we reject?

Quote:
And the causes are mainly religious.


why don't you give all religious wars you know, and see whose list is longer?

Cancel

Quote by ttwen

Quote by beyondmeasure
Give 'em all.


you know that yourself.

You made the assertion ttwen, the burden of proof falls on you. Saying 'you know it' is not valid.

Quote by ttwen dude, i'm referring to faith in science. i am not talking about results.

the result is a key component of the scientific method. the scientific method has completely no faith in it whatsoever.

Quote by ttwenof course it doesn't, but experience does. i am saying that you are not experienced enough to understand. but whatever...

by age and experience i was also implying experience...but that was my fault for not expressing myself clear enough i guess.

what im saying is that regardless of age, experience, education level etc, if an argument is rational and logically sound with supporting evidence, it is valid regardless of the person who made it.

Quote by ttwenif you say Bible teaches mass violence, do you see any Christian declaring a crusade today? or maybe take up suicide bombing in the name of God? of course, even if we don't talk about Christianity, what about Buddhism(if u consider that religion)? Buddhist followers are kind and forgiving, their karma concept is scary enough. i don't see Buddhism is teaching the wrong thing to humans.

.....do you even read my arguments? ill quote back a few posts....

Quote by fmp111My argument: The old testament preaches evil (not in all parts but it

  • Nov 20, 2008

priincess

priincess

?doing fun

Cancel

Quote: But that's NOT what logic means...if it's what you can accept by heart, then it's NOT logic...

logic is created by a man that means what suits him the best. Protagoras, an ancient Greek philosopher claimed "man is the measure of all things", this means each person's own will is the standard for what is right and wrong. the most obvious criticism is that this view implies that an act is right for someone, even if it's cruel, hateful, or tyrannical. but this is morally unacceptable.

Quote: I am rude to religion? Well if you count hostile criticism of its flaws rude then yes I am. Why should we respect anything that has immense impacts upon society ( a lot of which is negative) and is based upon irrational, out dated reasoning?

which part of the religion that makes you think it's wrong, since each religion tells how to be good. it's the person himself who makes negative things

Quote: Science requires absolutely no faith! Why? By definition, faith is belief which does not rely on logical proof or empirical evidence. If science relied upon faith, it would be no more rational than religion!

do you know what faith is? is what someone believe. like when you go to a place using a car, you know it's safe then you go by it. it is called faith. everyone has, if you arent you're not a human. scientists use the Bible as one of their sources, like why God doesnt allows us to eat pork? scientists worked on it and then knew, this pork cant be eaten for causing cholesterol.

Quote: You clearly do not understand the scientific method, I quote you:

like you know anything about science. even scientists are human so they make mistakes, because what they do is making ideas which are forms of theories that are experimented to be used in our life. and btw, God creates science so we the believers also dont mean to against scientist. the different is that you dont believe anything beside science. and how you can explain when a man prays for sick people then they become healthy again, isnt it because the power of God? even scientists cant explain this power.

Quote: First of all you have to establish god exists before you can assert he created science.

Secondly, i dont understand how scientists use the bible as a source of evidence. The bible is pretty much the last thing any good scientist use as a basis for their conclusions.

why God never proves His existance by giving absolute proofs, it's because He want us to find him, not by He goes to you first. and by you try finding Him proves your faith, that's what He seek in people's heart. and without proofs that earthly people always seek, we who know God can feel the existance of Him. it's the person that He chooses are the one who can feels that He's exist. and the person He chooses is only the one who understand Him. and how do you think bible is pretty much the last thing any good scientist use as a basis bla bla bla, you havent know much, absolutely you have never heard of this, do you?

Quote: Faith by definition is belief without need of evidence. It is this belief without evidence that is irrational. Irrational thinking (in short) is thinking that is not logically sound.

right. wrong. for the third, you cant make a conclusion that faith isnt logical, for mankind creates logic, and what logic for generally is the standard that we use in life. but for believers, God's logically understood.

Quote: It is true that many things are misused for greed etc, but you see religion is one of the main tools The thing is that religion and the gods inherent to them, are just constructs of human society and thus subject to its same flaws (an example would be in one of my previous posts, where the bible clearly advocated mass violence).

who gods, there are no gods. do you mean that they created mass violence, since nothing in the Bible tells to do bad things. when a person starts to believe in God there will be more and more trials for him to make his faith bigger, and it's the chance for the devil to persuade him to do bad things to make him leave God. that's how you find so many terrorists in the name of 'god' kill people , make bombs and take suicides.

Quote: I still don't understand how a rejection of religion and faith is narrow minded. However i do agree that narrow-mindedness is very dangerous, and faith is in particular, very narrow minded.

a man who thinks he isnt perfect yet must learn from the experts to make him a better person. since you arent you shouldnt claim this is bad and this is good (God's the Judge so it's the right for Him to judge His things and also His creatures) and better starts create a better life. and what expert means is the one who moves his life with good things, never do bad things such as against people, lying, kills, etc. what good is what God tells what to do.

Quote: + points to televangelists, Vatican's anti-contraceptive stance, Christianity's anti-homosexual stance (in general) +

is this inside the Bible, no, you dont even read it.

Quote: I believe both are equally important and cant be compared to each other on a level of importance as they both serve different functions in society even though at times the cross each other.

well of course both are important since both are created by God

Quote: the result is a key component of the scientific method. the scientific method has completely no faith in it whatsoever.

as i said that faith is what we believe, what we believe without thinking the proofs.. at first

Quote: Furthermore, once again on the issue of faith, the belief in entities without evidence and logical soundness is narrow minded.

scienece first believe everything without proofs.

Quote: Religion is very narrow minded.

couldnt you not saying it twice

Quote: I think there are two main 'groups' of religious people: there are fanatics and then there are moderates.

i can say that not every religious people are good, because sometimes they arent so. what you can trust is a very good one, who is really close to Him that never does anything bad in life. i can say that im not a very good one too, since i sometimes lie and dont go to church and so on. but i speak about God and Jesus based from my experiences and what God tells me, because i, who hasnt known anything about God at first, one day became to know Him more and more and i know when i speak with you God helps me to answer those questions which i havent known the answers at first. and that's the power of God and i hope you'll understand someday. God bless y'all ^^v

Signature
	Image

ttwen

ttwen

somebody

Cancel

seriously, you are a bit of a headache. you don't seem to understand a word i am saying and yet you argue on and on... and you seem to read differently than i expected, because to you, i am rebutting everything you said. and you too, claiming that i keep on misunderstanding you, and so on. since there are so much miscommunications here, this might as well be my last post with you.

Quote by fmp111
This means that religious people today(most of them, except the ones who blow themselves up in the name of allah etc) do not follow the evil within religious texts because they have an external moral code and they 'cherry pick' parts that are acceptable by their own external moral standards and ignore the evil parts.

This external moral code has evolved out of purely human or secular reasons due to the necessities of modern society. In short, people's intrinsic morals have nothing to do with religion and everything to do with secular reasons.

is that even cherry picking? so what if the Bible is full of violence? it does not teach violence. we follow (or try to) the 10 commandments, and we follow Jesus' teachings. intrinsic morals do have a lot to do with religion. i suggest you refer to countries bounded to religious laws. after all, laws can become moral.

Quote:
Your first rebuttal on televangelists: Just because it doesn't happen in your country doesn't mean that it does not happen, nor does it deny you of the ability to comment. We live in an age where things are becoming more and more connected to a global community, we should care about events in other nations.

it won't happen in my country. i heard of it, but like i said, i WON'T comment about it, because i have never watch one, and comments from people who have not experience that is not very credible.

Quote:
Your final rebuttal on homosexuality: That is based on so many assumptions; your assuming god exists, your assuming god cares about humanity; your assuming that he deems homosexuality to be a sin and immoral. but these are just unsubstantiated assumptions! You deem homosexuality to be unnatural? well its well documented in the animal kingdom- homosexual behavior is seen in almost 1500 species see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_animals). And from a modern rational view, homosexuality isn't morally wrong as it is not harming anyone.

you see, this is what i think about your statement: you are saying because animals did it, we can do it too? so because lions eat up dead babies for nutrients, we could do it too? and because crocodiles even eat other young crocodiles as meals, so we could do it too? you can say they are not connected, but i say, since you are comparing humans with animals, why are you comparing on one particular behavior only? or do you compare when it is convenient to you?

Quote:
Your second rebuttal on anti-contraceptives: Well this anti-contraceptive idea is being actively preached in many areas of Africa where unfortunately, communities only access to any moral guidance is through the catholic church. The problem with this is that there is a MASSIVE AIDS problem where about 24.5 MILLION people are infected with HIV and about 2 million people DIE every year (2005 statistics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDS_in_Africa). Preaching about the sin of condom use is a complete disaster!

you see, for Christians it is adulterous to have numerous sex partners. and AIDS happen because people just like to have numerous sex partners. ( i hope you get what i mean) i won't make a serious comment on anti-contraceptives, because the Bible did not say anything about that.

Quote:
...You failed to see once again, that my argument is that archeology (and its method of referring to ancient texts as evidence) does not use the scientific method and thus cannot be called a 'science'.

archeology -> no scientific method? you better look into your favorite wikipedia again. look for carbon dating for an easier reference. i am not calling archeology/history as part of science either.

aside from those, i am doing a science course (the application to be exact) and i can be considered as deeply religious because i do not doubt God, since found my answers in doubting God long time ago. i am a proof that science and religion can coexists together. yet, there are others like me, professors, students, professionals, anything.

ChiekoKawabe

ChiekoKawabe

Music, music, I love K-Pop!!

Cancel

I kind of thought this was going to be a mature argument, but I thought wrong. I think humans need a blend of science & religion to properly survive. Religion provides hope, while science makes sense of it. In other words, with science, we're not completely confused, and with religion, we're not scared of the events that this so-called science thing says is going to happen. It is kind of funny how some old Bibles I've read cites some "discoveries" that scientists have made today, though...

Cancel

Oooooh boy this is gonna be a long post.....


First of all to priincess:

Quote by priincess logic is created by a man that means what suits him the best. Protagoras, an ancient Greek philosopher claimed "man is the measure of all things", this means each person's own will is the standard for what is right and wrong. the most obvious criticism is that this view implies that an act is right for someone, even if it's cruel, hateful, or tyrannical. but this is morally unacceptable.

First of all, you raise a very interesting point, that i have been thinking about lately- upon the nature of stuff like math and logic, whether it is created by man or discovered by man etc (i should perhaps start a thread about that some other time). but regardless of whether it is invented or discovered you have the definition of logic. I'll quote the the Macquarie definition of logic:

"The system or principles of reasoning applicable to any branch of knowledge or study; the science which investigates the principles governing correct or reliable inference.

(Inference is defined as : The process of deriving the strict logical consequence of assumed premises.)"

Basically this means logic is a system that allows one to come to valid conclusions from premises. it has nothing to do with the subjectivity of individuals.

Quote by princess which part of the religion that makes you think it's wrong, since each religion tells how to be good. it's the person himself who makes negative things

Ive answered this at least thrice throughout this debate but fine here we go again: firstly religion doesn't always teach good. I'll give you a quote from the bible (which was also present in my second post in this thread but since you don't seem to be reading my previous posts....):

king james version- DEUTERONOMY 13:13-16 Certain men, the children of Belial are gone from among you, and have withdrawn the inhabitants of their city, saying, let us go and serve other gods, which ye have not known: Then shalt though enquire and make search, and ask diligently; and, behold, if it be truth, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought among you; Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that is therein, and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword. And though shalt gather all the spoil of it into the midst of the street thereof, and shalt burn with fire the city, and all the spoil thereof every whit, for the LORD thy God: and it shall be an heap for ever; it shall not be built again.

this is clearly advocating the slaughter and razing...and well..complete and utter destruction of a whole city due to their differing beliefs...

Secondly, in response to your argument that its the followers that commit acts of evil (I have already addressed this in my previous post): The followers are still motivated by religion regardless of their interpretation. Because of the embrace of faith, followers reject their logical reasoning and this allows them to do evil things. Examples again would be the Spanish inquisition, the crusades, the terrorist bombings of the twin towers etc. Countless acts of evil have been committed in the name of 'god'.

Quote by priincessdo you know what faith is? is what someone believe. like when you go to a place using a car, you know it's safe then you go by it. it is called faith. everyone has, if you aren't you're not a human. scientists use the Bible as one of their sources, like why God doesn't allows us to eat pork? scientists worked on it and then knew, this pork cant be eaten for causing cholesterol.

Again i have defined faith at least twice in my previous posts but again:

"Mental acceptance of and confidence in a claim as truth without proof supporting the claim."-http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/faith

Now when you use a car, you have evidence to suggest that the car is safe, it is improbable (given the frequency of use of cars) that the car would cause any harm though proper use. It is NOT faith as it is belief with supporting proof. Scientists do not use the bible as evidence because it is not empirical evidence, it is a book of bronze aged, illogical myths.

Your reasoning that pork shouldn't be eaten because it causes cholesterol is just plain silly. you know what else causes increase in LDL cholesterol? pretty much anything with saturated fats... so basically butter, coconut, beef, eggs, salmon, nuts...etc a very large range of foods....so by your flawed logic we shouldn't eat them either.

Extending your flawed logic a bit more, we shouldn't consume anything that has negative side effects for us...you know what can have a negative side effect on you? salt may cause high blood pressure (which by the way is necessary to maintain the solute concentration in your blood and for normal nerve function) even EXCESS WATER CONSUMPTION (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_intoxication) will kill you; you drink too much and you cause an imbalance of electrolytes.

Through the extension of your flawed logic i have managed to show that drinking water is bad.

which is completely silly.

You see its not the nature of the food you eat but it is the quantity that causes harm....

Quote by priincesslike you know anything about science. even scientists are human so they make mistakes, because what they do is making ideas which are forms of theories that are experimented to be used in our life. and btw, God creates science so we the believers also dont mean to against scientist. the different is that you dont believe anything beside science. and how you can explain when a man prays for sick people then they become healthy again, isnt it because the power of God? even scientists cant explain this power.

Firstly, i wont claim to have a deep knowledge of science but i do have a sufficient general knowledge to understand the scientific method.

Secondly, it doesn't matter that scientists make mistakes, the theories are updated and corrected according to current evidence.

"God creates science so we the believers also don't mean to against scientist. the different is that you don't believe anything beside science. and how you can explain when a man prays for sick people then they become healthy again, isn't it because the power of God? even scientists cant explain this power."

this part is reaaaaaly outrageous!
-firstly your assuming that god exist(when there is no evidence that proves beyond reasonable doubt that god exists)
-Secondly there are areas that science directly conflicts with religion. your anecdotal evidence of prayer is not valid evidence as it is not empirical. It is also a confirmation bias... essentially it was just luck that the people get cured.

I'll show you an example of the opposite. faith healing (especially in america) has caused many deaths...here are some examples(from my previous posts...):

Quote by fmp111

  • Nov 21, 2008

beyondmeasure

From the mind comes the query.

Cancel

Quote by ChiekoKawabeI kind of thought this was going to be a mature argument, but I thought wrong. I think humans need a blend of science & religion to properly survive. Religion provides hope, while science makes sense of it. In other words, with science, we're not completely confused, and with religion, we're not scared of the events that this so-called science thing says is going to happen. It is kind of funny how some old Bibles I've read cites some "discoveries" that scientists have made today, though...

I need to address this, for this is so distressingly common (and since the OP hasn't noticed it yet, or so I read):

X makes one happy =/= X is true, in much the same way that an imaginary friend is just that: imaginary.

X-P

  • Nov 22, 2008

priincess

priincess

?doing fun

Cancel

woow, how many hours you do this? :)

Quote: whether it is created by man or discovered by man etc

nothing is created by a man, but you can use 'rebuild' or 'recreate'

Quote: Basically this means logic is a system that allows one to come to valid conclusions from premises. it has nothing to do with the subjectivity of individuals.

well interesting. i think what is good and what is wrong is more based from the heart, so it must be subjective. if it is a system then your mind or mine should be the same because you call it 'system'

Quote: I'll give you a quote from the bible

since the Old Testament is based on Moses, the one that we must read and follow is the New Testament, it's when Jesus comes. Moses is for Islam, Islam do this 'eye for an eye' i dont agree with that. the Old testament is just for us to read the history

Quote: The followers are still motivated by religion regardless of their interpretation. Because of the embrace of faith, followers reject their logical reasoning and this allows them to do evil things. Examples again would be the Spanish inquisition, the crusades, the terrorist bombings of the twin towers etc. Countless acts of evil have been committed in the name of 'god'.

it's their fault not God. if i give you a beer than you are drunk millions of beer and you can just say ' i am motivated by this person' but you are the one who do wrong. and since the followers know that killing or bombing isnt a right thing to do but they do those, do you blame God for these, for telling the right thing to do? and not religion gives the motivation but the devil. and the interpretations are from the devil

Quote: "Mental acceptance of and confidence in a claim as truth without proof supporting the claim

since this is what a man write it's not perfect. many different dictionaries can say different things bout faith. faith is from God, not from the dictionary

Quote: Scientists do not use the bible as evidence because it is not empirical evidence, it is a book of bronze aged, illogical myths.

how do you know about it? of course even if Bible werent true scientists would still do experiments about the pork, because it's interesting. and if the Bible is created by people what is the use of saying things like dont eat pork if they havent known that it causes cholesterol?

Quote: Now when you use a car, you have evidence to suggest that the car is safe, it is improbable (given the frequency of use of cars) that the car would cause any harm though proper use. It is NOT faith as it is belief with supporting proof.

smart. but that improbable you can call it proof although it's small, proof that some people are safe riding the car.

Quote: so by your flawed logic we shouldn't eat them either.

but the pork is the highest. and maybe God starts with the pork so scientists can figure everything else cholesterolic.

Quote: Extending your flawed logic a bit more, we shouldn't consume anything that has negative side effects for us...you know what can have a negative side effect on you? salt may cause high blood pressure (which by the way is necessary to maintain the solute concentration in your blood and for normal nerve function) even EXCESS WATER CONSUMPTION (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_intoxication) will kill you; you drink too much and you cause an imbalance of electrolytes.

it starts with the pork to everything else. ha. and the pork thing i think comes from ancient law, since it's in Old Testament. in the Bible you can find any kind of thing written like your name, etc but generally, not written all. i mean only the point.

Quote: Secondly, it doesn't matter that scientists make mistakes, the theories are updated and corrected according to current evidence.

if a scientist make an uncorrect conclusion and it affects to the food we eat we can die. anything is posible.

Quote: (when there is no evidence that proves beyond reasonable doubt that god exists)

for believers we already have sensed and seen and felt the 'proofs'.

Quote: -Secondly there are areas that science directly conflicts with religion. your anecdotal evidence of prayer is not valid evidence as it is not empirical. It is also a confirmation bias... essentially it was just luck that the people get cured.

not conflicts and i can prove this. like the cure i said before, you can cure someone with science, and God gives you this knowledge for you to cure people. and for the believers we can cure people by faith. the methods are different but the goal is just the same. and you cant compare science with religion since it's not the same, like you compare number one and two. and if you rebuilt your mind, there's nothing you can say as a 'luck' for anything happens for a reason and scientist doesnt believe luck. and is it 1000 lucks if 1000 believers can cure people and they do this almost after prays?

Quote: I'll show you an example of the opposite. faith healing (especially in america) has caused many deaths...here are some examples(from my previous posts...):

not the healing but it's their time. well of course since it would be so many sick people

Quote: Firstly if there is no solid proof of god's existence then it is only rational to assume he does not exist.

what do you mean rational, if i who know God and He always answers me after my prays, knowing God werent exist would totally confusing my whole brain. since when that what you cant see is something that isnt exist. why people do this? because people create everything they want, like logic. so if they cant see then something isnt exist nor not logic. that's weird. and i say that logic for me isnt the same for you. i think God is totally logic, if God's not, i ask you, who creates us from the first time, since there must be a starter

Quote: if he can see into the future then he already knows our 'choices' we make in life and hence our choices are predetermined. Thus if an omniscient god exists, there can be no free will.

God is omniscient, not us. He gives us will because He wants His children to follow Him, but must suffer first. like this life. but you can do what is called, 'suffer happily' by follow His every words

Quote: oh and how do you even know that the god you believe in is the one and true god? there are plenty of other religions that claim truth.

what's the best is the one who teaches you right, not every single words you find the wrong thing. and there is only one right you can see. just follow your heart and ask God what the path yu must choose. if you have enough faith He'll answer you. although if you choose the wrong one you still want to do your best to serve Him and that's what God wants and He'll 'pay' this

Quote: i have already explained the principles of rationality, logic and argument theory(well i linked you to the last one). Now you cant be both a believer(by definition embracing faith) and logical at the same time. because FAITH ISN'T LOGICAL(see argument i made above about faith and logic).

that theory is from a man that isnt perfect. logic for me and you and anyone else are different, so we use a standard that we can all accept. this standard is from all of us and earthly that i dont want to choose, God is logic and God creates logic and what i think is God's logic, since i know who's the starter of creating this world and since you havent known it yet, where's your logic for this thing?

Quote: ok first of all, you have to prove the existence of both devils and gods.

if you had someone you know were sick and i brought my teacher there (who can cure by praying) you'd then believe Him, would you? o. 0 i cant prove it if you still dont want to hear any reasons start from the first time we did this. because the only one that controls you is you. and the one that can change you is only you. you'll search hundreds unanswered questions and i would have to explain it again and again and again (like i did months and months ago till now, same questions different people and even the same person asking it again).

Quote: secondly yes the bible does advocate some pretty damn evil things (see above quote).

this one i did answer

Quote: can have religious motives in committing acts of evil.

that's what i want to hear. they do that although it's not the religion fault. the motives are from the devil, because the thoughts of evil things are from the devil

Quote: and in case of islam, here is a quote that i find rather evil ".And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out....Such is the reward of those who suppress faith." (Koran 2:191)" so far I have provided examples of advocation of murder in both the bible and the koran.

so far i havent believed in Islam. and who in the Bible wrote' murder people'?

Quote: and in regards to morals, i do not and never will take my morals from a fictional deity.

this is what i call weird because what we cant see is something isnt exist. particles are exist but you cant see. and you cant see your mind but you can sense. you can feel your heart but if you feel sad or happy what's the different you can see inside your heart?

Quote: But even so i do not like to steal, i would prefer not to lie, and i don't relish the thought of killing at all. I think it is so much more sad that one only acts good to appease a higher power rather than acting good because you genuinely desire to help people.....

do not take revenge, do not keep stupid things in your mind, do not ever think anything bad for others. and so on. ^^ and for the last sentence, it's totally right, the true believer is the one who wants to serve God not because he wants the present behind it. and both choices you say are what i mean with 'stupid things'=something bad

Quote: Are you denying that the catholic church is against contraception and homosexuality? In fact, homosexuality is condemned in the bible: Leviticus 20:13 "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads. "

i dont beleive catholic but christianity since catholic at that time used a Letter Of (i forgot the name) to make one who repentances to God must pay for it in high price. and Christianity against homosexuality, because God creates us to love the opposite sex, out of this thing isnt right because comes from the devil

Quote: list me the examples of scientific theory that is not backed by evidence.

it's my theory. they make a conclusion first then they make experiments then they can prove it and give it to the world. is that right

Quote: I do not doubt the sincerity of your belief in god, i just think you are hallucinating god.

i didnt say that you thought i doubted God because it's obvious that im not, but i want to explain those not for you only but for all and i want to talk and explain about it. and since He answers my prays always and cure people (by someone's hand because God cant appear in front of us and do the cure because He has a reason for it, and He lets people He chooses do curing and this is how He works with us, He does things to us in earthly way to make it easy, in something we can accept) i do not think im hallucinating, you're just blind because many many people have already found God.

Signature
	Image

beyondmeasure

From the mind comes the query.

Cancel

+ facepalms +

... and here she goes again...

+ sighs +

  • Nov 23, 2008

page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 Next » 104 total items

Back to Religion & Science | Active Threads | Forum Index

Only members can post replies, please register.

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Read more.