Warning: Undefined array key "HTTP_ACCEPT_LANGUAGE" in /var/www/minitokyo/www/includes/common.inc.php on line 360 Which is more important, Science or religion? [continued] - Minitokyo

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

This thread is closed for posting.

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

Both is necessary.

ttwen

ttwen

somebody

Quote by beyondmeasure
... which goes a long way to sayin' that the Bible isn't correct in everything... especially ruminatin' on the need of Jesus to be linked to Joseph while insinuatin' that he was born of a virgin...


nope, Bible does not really contradicts, even though almost every story seems to contradict everything. it never gives a direct answer, just like Jesus' teachings; he never answers questions, or teaches directly to the point. he explains only when he is alone with his disciples. reading the Bible requires a lot of understanding and a lot of thinking, from the old testament to the new. when you understand, the contradictions naturally disperses.

Quote:
If I could find mine Bible, that is. For now, I'm relyin' on mine memory - on the prevention of intermarriage, read Nehemiah.


yes, i see your point. but remember the earlier chapters? Deuteronomy if i remember correctly, God intended to make Israel a holy nation of God. therefore in Nehemiah, since the Israelite are returned once again from the exile, they reinstitute the Law of Moses. and we see in those days many examples of consequences of intermarriage(for Israel), for example King Solomon. therefore to avoid outside influence, especially worshiping of pagan Gods in the holy nation, intermarriage is to be forbidden. but of course, those are those days. national laws can change, but not the moral laws. the 10 commandments still stand doesn't it?

Quote:
why insist on a kingly lineage (through Joseph) if he was born of a virgin?


as for this, Matthew is trying to emphasize to the Israelite that Jesus is indeed the prophesied king of Jews, therefore he listed out the ancestors of Joseph, who is indeed from a lineage of kings. meanwhile, even though Jesus was born from a virgin, he's rightful(human) father is still Joseph, who married Mary. as in levitage, even a foster son is considered to inherit his father's bloodline, so nothing wrong there.

Quote:
from quote: The men in Deuteronomy 13:13 was not innocent! He knew the 10 commandments yet he wanted to break it and even deceive people of Israel to follow him! How can you say that he is innocent?

... and where is it insinuated that he knew such, and even intended to "deceive"? Please, read your Scriptures.


hmm.. didn't we discuss something like that before? but whatever...

Quote:
Yes, they are atheists - Mao and Stalin (not Hitler - he's actually a Catholic, from mine sources). But the real query is: did they do such atrocities out of nonbelief? Or did they do these things out of some obssessively held dogma?

Methinks the second is more probable.


as for the example i stated, during the French Revolution, it was clearly out of non-belief though, plus the motivation that the churches those days own many properties. lets just say there are both.

carlozzzzbr

carlozzzzbr

Otaku-freak soldier

I will just copy and paste my reply on "Prove to me that god exists":

As Evangelion shows, God for humans is the one who has both the "seed of life" of angels, and the "seed of wisdom" from humans. So, God is an imortal human. Trully what makes me not tottaly dont believe god is the fact that so many ppl believe he does. Well i prefer the scientific side of the question, which is more provable and possible.

Before everyone trust undoubtly about god they should read about the Big Bang theory, the borning of Life in the Earth, and the most discussed "Origin of the Species".

But, the bigger proof that god is improbable is the fact that EVERY civilization had it own god. Gods are created to both unite ppl and solutionate the ethernal question of humans: What will happen when i die? I studied a lot of History and i know that humans tend to create a religion which is more amusing for them.

I can name one: Before the raising of Capitalism, there was only ONE religion in the entire West: The Catholicism. When the Middle age started to fall, new religions borned. Why? Because the Catholic Religion considered profit, accumulating things and pleasure Sins. Those new religions were not against those things, so they grew up supported by the rising of the capitalism. They ended up changing the Catholicism. You can see that today is not that much of a sin having pleasure, profit etc.

Summarizing: A religion begins with a civilization, trying to know about the unknown, or trying to unite things and ppl. God is created by those who create the religion, and pricipally, EXITS AS LONG THAT THERE IS SOMEONE SUPPORTING IT.

beyondmeasure

From the mind comes the query.

as for the example i stated, during the French Revolution, it was clearly out of non-belief though, plus the motivation that the churches those days own many properties. lets just say there are both.

Nonbelief? No - it was a mixture of factors; hatred, lust for power, freedom... I don't see where nonbelief enters in...

toumarie

toumarie

.:.:Princess:.:.

@kyubichan : Aah, thanks... I'm glad you finally understand what I mean, sorry.. my tenses are not too good..

Quote by beyondmeasurewhy insist on a kingly lineage (through Joseph) if he was born of a virgin?

Luke 2:1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed.
Luke 2:2 (And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.)
Luke 2:3 And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city.
Luke 2:4 And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; (because he was of the house and lineage of David:)
Luke 2:5 To be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child.

Quote by beyondmeasure... and where is it insinuated that he knew such, and even intended to "deceive"? Please, read your Scriptures.

Deuteronomy 12:29 When the LORD thy God shall cut off the nations from before thee, whither thou goest to possess them, and thou succeedest them, and dwellest in their land;
Deuteronomy 12:30 Take heed to thyself that thou be not snared by following them, after that they be destroyed from before thee;

Deceive :
Deuteronomy 13:12 If thou shalt hear say in one of thy cities, which the LORD thy God hath given thee to dwell there, saying,
Deuteronomy 13:13 Certain men, the children of Belial, are gone out from among you, and have withdrawn the inhabitants of their city, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which ye have not known;

Quote by beyondmeasureThe misuse of what science has given us. So? Are we into chalkboards now, tallyin' which has done more damage (which religion has done more anyway)?

Perhaps what I wrote can cause misunderstanding....
It's not that I wanted to compare which one has done more damage between science and religion but I just want to remind that there are things that happen in our life that can cause damage too and it has nothing to do with religion.

About this bein' cured by Jesus, so are you telling that I'm lying about my migraine and my legs problem?
My migraine is never coming back again until now and I believe it won't coming back again.
My legs, they are really normal now.
But, if you still want to say that I'm lying, whatever lah....

About the breast cancer that got healed, every details had been recorded in our church, even every single evidences from medics.
Some of them went to Germany or Singapore or other country to get treatment from medics before they finally reach the dead end and there is no hope anymore, no cash anymore, that time they wanted try to believe in Jesus and attended to church (some of them was come from non Christian).
Well, if you still that it's all just bullshit, whatever lah...

Quote by fmp111so the whole 'killing others because they worship other gods' is definitely not consistent clearly because of 'thou shall not kill', its a glaaaaring inconsistency and i have no idea how you managed to overlook that even in the same sentence.....

Have you read the Exodus 21:12-36?
How about I give an example. Imagine one kingdom who ruled by a King. He is the one who build this lovely kingdom and he sacrifice his strength, money, mind and everything to please its citizen by building a very wealthy kingdom. He made a rule or laws for its citizen to obey and if they didn't do it, the punishment will be death.
One day, he heard some news that inside one of his region, some people deceive others to serve under other kingdom who is actually this kingdom's enemy.
He ordered and investigate to find out the truth and he found that it is true. Then what should he do?
Let them be? He can't do that, he must punish them or else other regions will do the same things one day.
Then this king punish them by giving death punishment. Who do you think should execute these people? The king himself or people he chose?
Can you understand this example?
What the king said about "do not kill" is do not kill because envy, hate, etc.

Quote by fmp111Firstly, again let me reiterate that it isn't i who only claims that its 'improvement' that's basically how the scientific method works, and you claiming that this re-evaluation of knowledge is a flaw clearly demonstrates your lack of
understanding of the most fundamental of scientific principles... you see the thing is, what you call 'old science' is merely our understanding of the world we had back then based upon available evidence. What you call 'new science' is what we now know due to new evidence. But neither of these are SCIENCE.
The actual science is the process of RE-EVALUATION of current theories when new evidence presents itself, it is the process of experimentation in which empirical evidence is obtained to facilitate the above!

Okay, I might be not as smart as you.. how about give me an example of science that is already improve.

Quote by fmp111Secondly, your evidence for the power of prayer is not valid as it is anecdotal. it was not a CONTROLLED experiment where variables were considered. Furthermore your 'healing' would have either happen on its own without prayer due to normal recovery processes OR it is just the placebo effect. Either way there is no empirical evidence to verify faith healing. And in account of its consequences (see the faith healing deaths information that i posted a few posts back) it is definitely not the way to go.

If you don't want to believe what I wrote about my illness, it's alright...
But they admitted that the healing that happened to them is a gift from the Lord God, grace from God which I can say it's a miracle.

Quote by fmp111Global warming was caused because we did not fully understand the consequences of greenhouse emissions etc, now that we do know, we are taking steps to reduce it!

Hmm..isn't the greenhouse found by scientist?

Quote by fmp111The life span of homo sapiens has dramatically increased! From the upper paleolithic era the average lifespan was about 30 years old, now days the average lifespan ranges from about 60 all the way up to 80 years old depending upon the level of development of the country. that is a VERY large increase.

Really? Only reach 30 years old? Well, I just want to give one example; Moses live until he reached 120 years old.

Quote by fmp111What is the trigger of cancer? Cancer(generally) itself is caused by the mutation of cellular DNA causing rapid uncontrollable mitosis..Its trigger? both genetic and lifestyle.

Lifestyle...hmm.. including food?

Then, about HIV...
Paul Farmer, physician, anthropologist, and author of AIDS and Accusation: Haiti and the Geography of Blame, describes beliefs held by many Haitians that, while official accounts in the United States blame Haitians for the advent of AIDS in the West, the disease was actually sent to Haiti by Americans.[14] A common theme is that the U.S. wanted to get rid of Haitians because too many had immigrated to the States to work and jobs were running low. Assessing these (and other) conspiracy theories with a "hermeneutic of generosity," Farmer finds that they are based on a great deal more truth than many official accounts from the early days of the epidemic. Epidemiological studies reveal that the virus did indeed enter Haiti via Americans - gay tourists who had sex with young male sex workers, forced to perform this work due to abject poverty. The high rates of poverty, malnutrition, and poor medical infrastructure allowed HIV to spread easily within the Haitian population.

Quote by fmp111On to the melamine, melamine itself is NOT meant to be used as a food additive.It is used for industrial purposes in the production of polymers (amongst other uses). The melamine contamination of milk in china has nothing at all to do with science and everything to do with the poor regulation etc of chinese products.

And the scientist in the company who did the research found out that melamine can increase the content of protein for the milk.

Quote by fmp111Very true, but religion can also cause good people to do evil! If a person believes that it is divine word from the deity they worship, that they must strap explosives to themselves and blow themselves up, then they will do it out of sheer obedience to that deity.

Secondly, i don't blame everything on religion, there is still political motivation, racial motivation and just downright greed and hate etc. Saying that, i do believe that religion (and especially faith) is a major root of evil in society(however subtle the psychological conditioning may be).

Finally, Athiesm alone does not start wars. Athiesim is just the disbelief in a diety or deities. Thats it. Nothing else. It is just 'I do not believe'!
People do not start wars because they don't believe in god.

Religion is not the motivation but only a very easy and effective reason that comes up leader's mind to provoke his people. So it is not the motive but a reason to move leader's followers.
What actually inside the leader's mind, no one can tell but since they said that what they did was an order from god, so no wonder now you can say that religion is their motivation.

Religion is not a major root of evil in society.
For the love of money is the root of all evil.

People do not start wars because they don't believe in god, but they still can kills religious people even they're actually its citizen.
As for me, it means atheism start wars inside their own nation, kill its own citizen just because they want to believe in God. As for example, look what happen in North Korea.
Which is worse now? Get killed by other nation's military or get killed by your own government's military?

Religious people helped my country after Tsunami happened in Dec 2004. Many religious people was sent by churches and other religion community here in my country to help them, not only donate stuffs, foods, waters, medicines but also most of them stayed in there for months, separate from their family, friends only to accompany the victims and also helped them rebuild their house.

Signature Image
Member of The-Princess-Of-Orb
Member of The-Red-Knight
Member of Asucaga-Fanworks

ttwen

ttwen

somebody

Quote by toumarie
And the scientist in the company who did the research found out that melamine can increase the content of protein for the milk.


actually, melamine is added to make the milk seemed to have more protein, not to increase the protein.

@beyondmeasure:
if you are talking about the people, yes, but they were incited by the radical atheistic leaders, whose purpose was to denounce religion, with a mixture of greed, and using revolution's theme as an excuse.

toumarie

toumarie

.:.:Princess:.:.

@ttwen : oopss... bad me... you're right abut melamine.. thanks ttwen..

Signature Image
Member of The-Princess-Of-Orb
Member of The-Red-Knight
Member of Asucaga-Fanworks

i think both...

Quote by beyondmeasure

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


yes, religion is good because i can follow blindly and devote my life to living by a random document that someone way back wrote on a whim. In that case, playboy will be my bible and i will follow the way of the playboy. You people all go to church and say that your god is caring and loves all. But none of you have ever seen the evils that pervade the world and at some times one would actually wonder if god was so cruel to let certain things happen.

to ttwen

Quote by ttwennope, Bible does not really contradicts, even though almost every story seems to contradict everything. it never gives a direct answer, just like Jesus' teachings; he never answers questions, or teaches directly to the point. he explains only when he is alone with his disciples. reading the Bible requires a lot of understanding and a lot of thinking, from the old testament to the new. when you understand, the contradictions naturally disperses.

You know what? You could say the same for horoscopes hahaha.

to toumarie

Quote: Have you read the Exodus 21:12-36?
How about I give an example. Imagine one kingdom who ruled by a King. He is the one who build this lovely kingdom and he sacrifice his strength, money, mind and everything to please its citizen by building a very wealthy kingdom. He made a rule or laws for its citizen to obey and if they didn't do it, the punishment will be death.
One day, he heard some news that inside one of his region, some people deceive others to serve under other kingdom who is actually this kingdom's enemy.
He ordered and investigate to find out the truth and he found that it is true. Then what should he do?
Let them be? He can't do that, he must punish them or else other regions will do the same things one day.
Then this king punish them by giving death punishment. Who do you think should execute these people? The king himself or people he chose?
Can you understand this example?
What the king said about "do not kill" is do not kill because envy, hate, etc.

Alright, this example would be valid, if we were not talking about an omnipotent being here. Since your godis omnipotent, then he should just be able to make every one follow him willingly (as by definition of omnipotence; he is able to do anything). This reminds me of the problem of evil (also mentioned in my first post but ill mention it again):

"Is god willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then is he impotent. Is god able, but not willing? Then is he malevolent. Is god both able and willing? Whence then is evil? Is god neither able nor willing to prevent evil? Then why call him god"

Quote by toumarieOkay, I might be not as smart as you.. how about give me an example of science that is already improve.

Erm im sorry i don't understand your question, could you please rephrase?

Quote by toumarieIf you don't want to believe what I wrote about my illness, it's alright...
But they admitted that the healing that happened to them is a gift from the Lord God, grace from God which I can say it's a miracle.

Firstly, you might have recovered from illness, it doesn't matter. What i'm trying to tell you that it is not proof (as there is no resonable evidence) that any supernatural forces had healed you.

Let me give a simplified example:

Pretend i accidentally cut my hand. Now there are two options:

1. i pray to some supernatural force to heal my hand. Eventually i am healed.
2. I don't pray at all, but just leave it for a few weeks. Eventually i am healed.

Now by your description, your illness was much more severe than just a little cut on the hand, but the principle remains the same.

Quote by toumarieHmm..isn't the greenhouse found by scientist?

Yes the knowledge of the consequences of greenhouse emissions were discovered fairly recently, your point?

Quote by toumaireReally? Only reach 30 years old? Well, I just want to give one example; Moses live until he reached 120 years old.

Firstly, i regard moses as a fictional character. Secondly, it really doesn't matter, there are two possibilities i can give to rebut your argument.

1. There is, not only, insufficient evidence that moses even existed, but insufficient evidence that he had lived to 120.

2. If there were homo sapiens that had lived to 120 years of age during the upper paleolithic era, then they would be outliers.

Note that in my argument i had said the AVERAGE lifespan during that time was about 30. And when i say an increase to 60-80 years i am again talking about average life expectancy.

Using a single outlier (that had insufficient evidence in the first place) as counter evidence is invalid.

Quote by toumarieLifestyle...hmm.. including food?

Then, about HIV...
Paul Farmer, physician, anthropologist, and author of AIDS and Accusation: Haiti and the Geography of Blame, describes beliefs held by many Haitians that, while official accounts in the United States blame Haitians for the advent of AIDS in the West, the disease was actually sent to Haiti by Americans.[14] A common theme is that the U.S. wanted to get rid of Haitians because too many had immigrated to the States to work and jobs were running low. Assessing these (and other) conspiracy theories with a "hermeneutic of generosity," Farmer finds that they are based on a great deal more truth than many official accounts from the early days of the epidemic. Epidemiological studies reveal that the virus did indeed enter Haiti via Americans - gay tourists who had sex with young male sex workers, forced to perform this work due to abject poverty. The high rates of poverty, malnutrition, and poor medical infrastructure allowed HIV to spread easily within the Haitian population.

Firstly, yes lifestyle factors does include food.

Secondly, your counter argument for HIV may be true, but it is still invalid as a rebuttal to my initial argument. You have emphasised that it was gay sex that had caused HIV transmission from person to person, but that was not the origin of HIV in the first place.

Infact, its not just homosexuality that facilitates the transmission of HIV/AIDS, it can be transferred in a number of ways:

1.sexual transmission (in both heterosexual and homosexual cases).
2.Exposure to blood borne pathogens
3. Prenatal and Perinatal transmission can also occur.

Quote by toumarieAnd the scientist in the company who did the research found out that melamine can increase the content of protein for the milk.

As ttwen has stated, it only seemed to increase protein content. But this is merely a correction and not a counter argument.

The counter argument is as follows, the melamine scandal had no connection to the fallibility of the scientific method, and had everything to do with human greed etc.

No one kills in the name of science. Many kill in the name of politics, race, creed, hate, greed and even religion.

Quote by toumarieReligion is not the motivation but only a very easy and effective reason that comes up leader's mind to provoke his people. So it is not the motive but a reason to move leader's followers.
What actually inside the leader's mind, no one can tell but since they said that what they did was an order from god, so no wonder now you can say that religion is their motivation.

Firstly i disagree with your 'leader's mind' argument, but it doesn't really matter. What actually matters is that religion is used as a motivation for the people. And thus it is used as motivation none the less.

Continuing upon your analogy though, you do not see any leaders using science as a motivational tool for destruction.

Religion can be and is used as a motivation for evil.

to carlozzzzbr

Quote by carlozzzzbr A religion begins with a civilization, trying to know about the unknown, or trying to unite things and ppl. God is created by those who create the religion, and pricipally, EXITS AS LONG THAT THERE IS SOMEONE SUPPORTING IT.

Hmm i don't know what you mean by god only existing if there are worshipers, but i do agree with you that religion is nothing but a construct of culture and society.

Just like fmp111 told us that science is actually just a tool. It's all depend on the person whether to use it for good or bad.
And according to his statement, religion is the prime motive for good people to acts of evil.

In that case, it is not science the one which more important. Everything start from the motivation. If one religion teach good stuff such as helping victims of Tsunami, donating their stuff to help these victims. Or they can build a pump to get clean water in that area after Tsunami or earthquake. Everything they could to help these victims.
And they needs tools, technology and everything that science had ever found such as medicine, medical treatment etc.

If religion teach its believer through its leader to blow themselves and kill many people or to start a war, then they still use that tool, something that was created and found by scientist.

Science as fmp111 told us, it is just a tool, so if no one has any motivation to use it, everything that was found by scientist become a dead tool, no meaning.

For me, religion is more important than science. No matter the result, religion teach about good moral, that's the basic. The process and the result are depend on each person.

If a person hate someone, he/she can use religion by saying "God told me last night to punish this person because she is a witch"
And since this person has money and power or because she/he is a leader in that town, people will do what he/she told them.

Question : if that is the case, why God let that happen?
Answer : This is just an example and I didn't have this kind of experience. Remember what happened to Jesus Christ? Or Stephen?
It is looked that God is very cruel, but did they protest? They're not protesting to God so why we bother?

I have to admit that I am agree with toumarie that religion could be only a good reason to one leader to provoke his/her follower/people to do what she/he wants.

And also I want to add that religion can be just an excuse for someone to acts of evil because it is very easy now to say "God told me to do this...or to do that..." so when police or reporters or someone asked them what is the motive of this action, they can easily say "Oh, God was the one who told me".
Very irresponsible answer.

If science is only a tool then motivation is indeed more important that tools.
It can be political motivation, racial motivation, etc.
If no motivation, people couldn't create something such as technology for example.

Well, that is my opinion.

As for religion or if you want to prove yourself that God exists, don't act like childish such as if anything that you won't to be happen, God let it happen in your life, don't make so easily conclusion that "there is no God".
If God let that things happened in your life, if you feel that this is God's responsible, try make God to responsible for what happening in your life.
It is only an advice, so don't response on this statement. If you don't want to follow it, after you read it, just move to another page.

Even if you don't like religion for some reasons, don't spread your hatred towards every religious people. Don't make fun of religion, if you're mature enough, try to at least respect them because not every religious people want to blow themselves or kill people just because they leader told them it is God's order.

For religious people, I just want to tell you, if atheist people don't want believe in your words about God, don't force them. As long as you've already told them about Gospel, all you need to do next is pray for them, let God do the rest. But if one of them want to listen to you, go on, you can teach him/her to know more about God and still pray for him/her.

I'm not against science in this matter, but this thread is about which one is more important between science and religion. And I choose religion, why? You can read my answer above.

I respect science because in my opinion, with science, we can see the space, people can go to the moon, we have planes, trains, cars. Medical treatment to cure the sickness and find what caused it, healthy food etc. But I have to remind myself that it is still have the side effect of technology.

Don't be mad or feel offended with what I wrote in this thread. But, if you feel that what I wrote did make you feel offended then "I'm sorry".


Science. And there's really no need to argue about that. Cause i can't see what religion has better than science. That is if you had to choose one of the two; otherwise they can coexist since each has what it's useful for. But i'm just saying if a giant meteor heads towards earth, you'll use science to save your ass.

i say science. i'm not really much of a believer that religion is the only way to heaven or that church can make you a better person.

science can cure ur diseases not God. but God does take the credit for creating the guy who found the cure. he has to take credit for all human beings. good and bad.

that's why ppl who go to church believe the stuff about the guy not buying groceries and saying God will help him--when its the neighbor that bought the guy the groceries.

Music is in your eyes.
Music is in your soul.
Music is surrounding, everywhere you see.
Music is a reflection of who we wish to be.

to honoonotobira


Quote by honoonotobira Just like fmp111 told us that science is actually just a tool. It's all depend on the person whether to use it for good or bad.
And according to his statement, religion is the prime motive for good people to acts of evil.

In that case, it is not science the one which more important. Everything start from the motivation. If one religion teach good stuff such as helping victims of Tsunami, donating their stuff to help these victims. Or they can build a pump to get clean water in that area after Tsunami or earthquake. Everything they could to help these victims.
And they needs tools, technology and everything that science had ever found such as medicine, medical treatment etc.

If religion teach its believer through its leader to blow themselves and kill many people or to start a war, then they still use that tool, something that was created and found by scientist.

Science as fmp111 told us, it is just a tool, so if no one has any motivation to use it, everything that was found by scientist become a dead tool, no meaning.

You only got it half right, motivation alone is useless, tools allow us to achieve goals. Granted, nothing is accomplished with just tools and no motivation. But neither are goals achieved by motivation alone.

Science however does have a sense of motivation, it is the thirst for knowledge, it is the window; through which humanity can gaze at the incredible intricacy of the cosmos, through which we are awed at the beautiful harmony of the physical world. And thus, science is not just a dead tool- it is both a tool to advance technology and inspiration, in the sense that it enriches our lives immensely (This however is on a very personal note, regardless of this, i have shown that it can also be used as motivation ).

Quote by honoonotobiraFor me, religion is more important than science. No matter the result, religion teach about good moral, that's the basic. The process and the result are depend on each person.

I disagree, religion does not teach about moral good, instead it REFLECTS human morality that is innate within us.

A simple example: Chimpanzees are ignorant of religion, but in chimp societies, life is relatively harmonious and cohesive. They do not mindlessly harm and kill each other, quite the opposite in fact.

Even chimps, with limited capacity of intelligence (compared to humans) have an innate sense of 'moral' good. It is an evolutionary imperative that social species develop an behavioral set of morals. Otherwise their societies cannot be maintained.

Let us extend this to human societies. We grow moral for social reasons, religion (which is a consequence of human civilization) merely reflects the morals of the society.

As societies grow more complex, morality grows more complex. An example of this is the advocation of slavery in the bible. During the bronze aged origins of the bible, society was much more simple and consequently, the religious morals presented within the bible are simplistic.

Today, when there is a need for much greater moral complexity (which i again reinforce, is nothing to do with religion and everything to do with the developing complexity of society) the thought of slavery is abominable.

in short, the bible merely reflects morality, it is not the SOURCE of morality, which lies inherently within the formation of society itself.

Quote by honoonotobiraQuestion : if that is the case, why God let that happen?
Answer : This is just an example and I didn't have this kind of experience. Remember what happened to Jesus Christ? Or Stephen?
It is looked that God is very cruel, but did they protest? They're not protesting to God so why we bother?

Im sorry i completely don't understand you at all, could you please rephrase?

Quote by honoonotobiraAnd also I want to add that religion can be just an excuse for someone to acts of evil because it is very easy now to say "God told me to do this...or to do that..." so when police or reporters or someone asked them what is the motive of this action, they can easily say "Oh, God was the one who told me".
Very irresponsible answer.

EXACTLY! it is a very irresponsible answer. But if the person giving this answer actually believes that god told them to do so (and they believed it upon grounds of faith), then it is perfectly rational (given that their belief is rational, which by the way, is not. which demonstrates the flaw of faith).

This is the same kind of motivation that sparked the twin tower attacks.

Quote by honoonotobiraIf science is only a tool then motivation is indeed more important that tools.
It can be political motivation, racial motivation, etc.
If no motivation, people couldn't create something such as technology for example.

again motivation is not more important than the tools, if one only has motivation and has no access to tools, then it is unlikely that the goal would be achieved. Let me use a simplified (but slightly flawed) analogy: what is more important, the pilot of a plane, or the engine?

Without the pilot, the plane does not proceed to its destination. Without the plane, the pilot cannot go.

There are many alternative, and less destructive sources of motivation religion.

Quote by honoonotobiraAs for religion or if you want to prove yourself that God exists, don't act like childish such as if anything that you won't to be happen, God let it happen in your life, don't make so easily conclusion that "there is no God".
If God let that things happened in your life, if you feel that this is God's responsible, try make God to responsible for what happening in your life.

ok, without any intention to cause offense, that was so incoherent.....

i THINK this is what your trying to say: In regards to the existence of god, don't be childish and naively conclude that there is no god. God manifests himself in life, and if you feel his presence then he exists.....

I may be wrong, but from my understanding of what you have just said; i find this completely illogical. A gut feeling that there is a supernatural being in no way verifies the being's existence. For example, children often think that there are monsters under their beds....just because they 'feel' the monster there does not mean it exists....

To prove that something exists, there must be evidence, not a gut feeling.

Quote by honoonotobiraEven if you don't like religion for some reasons, don't spread your hatred towards every religious people. Don't make fun of religion, if you're mature enough, try to at least respect them because not every religious people want to blow themselves or kill people just because they leader told them it is God's order.

i wish to clarify something, throughout this thread, there seems to be a misconception on the subject of my hostility. I DO NOT HATE RELIGIOUS PEOPLE, I AM HOSTILE TO THE RELIGIONS THEMSELVES, I AM HOSTILE TO THE CONCEPT OF FAITH, I AM HOSTILE TO THE SUPPORT AND ADMIRATION OF FAITH. I do not hate the actual people, i just think that they are misguided into thinking illogically.

Quote by honoonotobiraFor religious people, I just want to tell you, if atheist people don't want believe in your words about God, don't force them. As long as you've already told them about Gospel, all you need to do next is pray for them, let God do the rest. But if one of them want to listen to you, go on, you can teach him/her to know more about God and still pray for him/her.

On behalf of myself, and many (but not all) other atheists, i would like to tell you that we do not need nor want your prayers. If we wish to improve our lives we will not seek help from a supernatural being. If we are interested in what you have to say about god, we will ask.

Quote by honoonotobiraI respect science because in my opinion, with science, we can see the space, people can go to the moon, we have planes, trains, cars. Medical treatment to cure the sickness and find what caused it, healthy food etc. But I have to remind myself that it is still have the side effect of technology.

Firstly a distinction should be made between science and technology, science is the process in which knowledge is gained about the physical world. Technology is the tools that we create due to that knowledge.

Secondly, it is all well and good to remind ourselves and review the ethics of technology and how it can be better improved.

But please, also do so for religion.

Quote by honoonotobiraDon't be mad or feel offended with what I wrote in this thread. But, if you feel that what I wrote did make you feel offended then "I'm sorry".

None taken, and likewise.

ttwen

ttwen

somebody

@fmp111's most recent post
- science can be done without thirst for knowledge; it can also be done for thirst for destruction, desperation for something, a show of power etc etc.

- chimps do kill each other in clan wars/territory dispute between colonies.

-"again motivation is not more important than the tools"
(1) motivation + tools = action.
(2) motivation + no tools = can't action, therefore no action
(3) no motivation + tools = no action
(4) no motivation + no tools = no action
i don't understand your logic here. i can't see how tools are more important than motivation when both must be true for an action. please explain your logic.

- i have a gut feeling that dark matters exists.

* i guess i just can't stand it anymore, i think you either deliberately leave some details out, or you really don't know them.

- horoscopes = not direct? i don't think so though, example horoscope:
"Normally you are happy to deal with social situations by sitting in the background. However, today you should expect to be vibrant and talkative as the ideas will flow fast and furious. In terms of romance you might need to be a little less demanding of a loved one!"
is this really full of hidden meanings? what i see from this i just a quick prediction, and suggested reaction.

@toumarie
global warming is natural. humans accelerate it. scientists are speculating that because of human interference, the coming of the next ice age might be delayed(for a while). there are times in the past where earth was way warmer than today though.

Quote by fmp111This 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!

What the?
No offense to you dude, but I think you should be more wise and mature enough to explain the good part of science since you chose science is more important to you.

But reading your first post as the thread starter, you only say "Science!" and the rest is all about how religion in your opinion. Tsk..tsk...tsk...
Is this thread's goal just to destroy religion vocally face to face?... oh dear...

toumarie

toumarie

.:.:Princess:.:.

Quote by fmp111Alright, this example would be valid, if we were not talking about an omnipotent being here. Since your godis omnipotent, then he should just be able to make every one follow him willingly (as by definition of omnipotence; he is able to do anything).

So, it is consistent now to you?
Sir, at first we discuss about the inconsistency/consistency in Holy Bible and then I give an explanation that it is consistent about what happened in Deuteronomy and 10 commandments by giving an example.

God created human (with their own freewill) and not a robot.
God gave human power to rule the earth.
Based on my experience, God is able and willing to prevent evil in my life.

@fmp111 : I never thought you're going to write about cut a hand. Well, my brother had this kind of experience while he was a little boy. It's not his hand, it's only his finger.
It can be rotten and the doctor will have to amputate it, so after the operation, the doctor only said, "I did my best."
As a people who believe in God, we have only one option; pray.

Alright, I'm not going to argue anymore in this thread.
I just want to say this for the last time.

As you have said fmp111, there are so many motivation that can make people do acts of evil, so if you want, don't blame everything bad to religion because there are so many religious people who don't do the acts of evil. I just want you to at least respect us.

I believe in God and His miracle and live in it is far more joyful for me.

@ttwen : yeah, perhaps you're right about global warming. Guess this topic don't suit me ne~? Because I don't really understand about science and just shocked after read fmp111 first comment.

Quote by honoonotobiraIf you like science than religion, just point out why you like science only. Why should you point out why you dislike religion and even make fun of it?

Well, I'm agree with you sir.

Signature Image
Member of The-Princess-Of-Orb
Member of The-Red-Knight
Member of Asucaga-Fanworks

priincess

priincess

?doing fun

ha ha you're funny naturally

Quote: science can cure ur diseases not God.

i think you're wrong since many people has cured diseases without using science n just by praying, the power from God. and science also religion are different so we cant compare it. u can cure people by science or by God. but science is from God too

Signature Image

kyubichan

kyubichan

Mobile Blackhole

Quote by naturally
What the?
No offense to you dude, but I think you should be more wise and mature enough to explain the good part of science since you chose science is more important to you.

But reading your first post as the thread starter, you only say "Science!" and the rest is all about how religion in your opinion. Tsk..tsk...tsk...
Is this thread's goal just to destroy religion vocally face to face?... oh dear...

:(

I agree with that.

It's sad to see this thread go this way, when for once, there are religious people who actually throw in their beliefs without just shouting random things about God and religions, their posts are actually coherent, and they're not rude at all.

It's quite obvious which side is being rude at this point.

Because yes!

Quote by fmp111You only got it half right, motivation alone is useless, tools allow us to achieve goals. Granted, nothing is accomplished with just tools and no motivation. But neither are goals achieved by motivation alone.

Motivation alone is useless neither are goals achieved by motivation alone? I don't think so.
How about using a lie to achieve goals, such as getting a sympathy from others?
How about using a slander onto someone I don't like so nobody want to become her/his friend?
How about chocked to death a person because I hate him/her?
How about pushing someone from high place (not buildings) to kill him/her because I envy her/him?
How about drawning someone until he/she dead because he/she always make fun of me?
How about give a hug to my little brother/sister who need it at that time because I love them?
How about to accompany a person when he/she need it because I love them?
How about just sit and listen to someone story because he/she want to share his/her problem with me?
These kind of acts don't need a tool and each goal achieved by motivation alone.

Quote by fmp111Science however does have a sense of motivation, it is the thirst for knowledge, it is the window; through which humanity can gaze at the incredible intricacy of the cosmos, through which we are awed at the beautiful harmony of the physical world.

So, it is right. Everything started from motivation not from a tool.

Quote by fmp111And thus, science is not just a dead tool- it is both a tool to advance technology and inspiration, in the sense that it enriches our lives immensely (This however is on a very personal note, regardless of this, i have shown that it can also be used as motivation ).

Again motivation is not more important than the tools, if one only has motivation and has no access to tools, then it is unlikely that the goal would be achieved. Let me use a simplified (but slightly flawed) analogy: what is more important, the pilot of a plane, or the engine?
Without the pilot, the plane does not proceed to its destination. Without the plane, the pilot cannot go.

I'm sorry I have to cut your quotes like that.
What I wrote (about being a dead tool) actually like this :
Science as fmp111 told us, it is just a tool, so if no one has any motivation to use it, everything that was found by scientist become a dead tool, no meaning.
I'm taking your example (the pilot of plane and the engine).

First, there is no motivation in your example. Pilot of plane is not a motivation. And for engine, I believe you take this as the tool and I am agree with you this one. Pilot of plane acts only a person who will use the tool, not a motivation.
The motivation should be like this "Do not want to wasting time" or "Have to arrive at that place ASAP" or "It is safer" or "It is cheaper" etc.

Second, about the dead tool. An example : the plane's engine.
If one day, people lost their motivation of using plane, the plane and its engine only stay at its garage.

Quote by fmp111I disagree, religion does not teach about moral good, instead it REFLECTS human morality that is innate within us.
A simple example: Chimpanzees are ignorant of religion, but in chimp societies, life is relatively harmonious and cohesive. They do not mindlessly harm and kill each other, quite the opposite in fact.
Even chimps, with limited capacity of intelligence (compared to humans) have an innate sense of 'moral' good. It is an evolutionary imperative that social species develop an behavioral set of morals. Otherwise their societies cannot be maintained.
Let us extend this to human societies. We grow moral for social reasons, religion (which is a consequence of human civilization) merely reflects the morals of the society.
As societies grow more complex, morality grows more complex. An example of this is the advocation of slavery in the bible. During the bronze aged origins of the bible, society was much more simple and consequently, the religious morals presented within the bible are simplistic.
Today, when there is a need for much greater moral complexity (which i again reinforce, is nothing to do with religion and everything to do with the developing complexity of society) the thought of slavery is abominable.
in short, the bible merely reflects morality, it is not the SOURCE of morality, which lies inherently within the formation of society itself.

First, I am not going to compare between human and animal as an example.
What the chimps and other animals do is only based on instinct about how to survive.

Second, religion teachs moral good and I'll give you one example about it. Only religion (Christianity) teachs to give mercy onto someone who hurts you deeply. It teachs to forgive someone who is actually not worthed to be forgiven.
This teaching usually become the most difficult to do by a believer because usually people want to take revenge.
Religion teachs not to divorce, religion teachs to loyal to your partner (husband, wife, boyfriend, girlfriend), religion teachs to give more and not to take more etc.

Quote by fmp111

Quote by honoonotobiraQuestion : if that is the case, why God let that happen?
Answer : This is just an example and I didn't have this kind of experience. Remember what happened to Jesus Christ? Or Stephen?
It is looked that God is very cruel, but did they protest? They're not protesting to God so why we bother?


Im sorry i completely don't understand you at all, could you please rephrase?

First, actually my quote is a continuation with the words above its.
Second, I just only give a simple answer, do not analyze other people's life.

Quote by fmp111EXACTLY! it is a very irresponsible answer. But if the person giving this answer actually believes that god told them to do so (and they believed it upon grounds of faith), then it is perfectly rational (given that their belief is rational, which by the way, is not. which demonstrates the flaw of faith).
This is the same kind of motivation that sparked the twin tower attacks.

I don't think every each of them really heard god's voice directly. I believe, their leader or elder who told them that he/she heard god speak to her/him and god told him/her to blow the twin tower or to blow a chosen place in Bali etc.

Quote by fmp111i THINK this is what your trying to say: In regards to the existence of god, don't be childish and naively conclude that there is no god. God manifests himself in life, and if you feel his presence then he exists.....
I may be wrong, but from my understanding of what you have just said; i find this completely illogical. A gut feeling that there is a supernatural being in no way verifies the being's existence. For example, children often think that there are monsters under their beds....just because they 'feel' the monster there does not mean it exists....
To prove that something exists, there must be evidence, not a gut feeling.

First, it's for believer and for non-believer who used to be a believer.
Second, how about the wind?

Quote by fmp111i wish to clarify something, throughout this thread, there seems to be a misconception on the subject of my hostility. I DO NOT HATE RELIGIOUS PEOPLE, I AM HOSTILE TO THE RELIGIONS THEMSELVES, I AM HOSTILE TO THE CONCEPT OF FAITH, I AM HOSTILE TO THE SUPPORT AND ADMIRATION OF FAITH. I do not hate the actual people, i just think that they are misguided into thinking illogically.

People, especially the religious one who read your first statement in this thread wouldn't think that way.
If that's the case, do not use crude language and making fun of what we believe again, or else it's just the same.

Quote by fmp111On behalf of myself, and many (but not all) other atheists, i would like to tell you that we do not need nor want your prayers. If we wish to improve our lives we will not seek help from a supernatural being. If we are interested in what you have to say about god, we will ask.

Who said I am going to pray for you? I don't even know you. I only pray for myself and people around me. You can relax now.
Just wait and see what science can do when the time comes (reach the dead end, no more hope, could do nothing anymore, depressed (which usually make people commit suicide), feeling unloved, etc).

Quote by fmp111Firstly a distinction should be made between science and technology, science is the process in which knowledge is gained about the physical world. Technology is the tools that we create due to that knowledge.

I knew it already, you can read again my quote.
And let me remind you that you're the one who wrote that science is a tool. Read below.
but here is a short summary of it: Science is a tool of humanity, that is all, a tool can be used for both good and evil without any inherent evil within the tool.

Quote by fmp111None taken, and likewise.


Okay. And again, if you feel that what I wrote did make you feel offended then I am sorry.

onyhow

Survivor...

Quote by priincessha ha you're funny naturally

Quote: science can cure ur diseases not God.

i think you're wrong since many people has cured diseases without using science n just by praying, the power from God. and science also religion are different so we cant compare it. u can cure people by science or by God. but science is from God too

Proof please...

I've not seen faith healing as effective method of curing disease except for being Placebo...

Even if we give proof, someone who's got healed by just believe and pray to God, you will just take it as a lie, correct?

Spystreak

Retired Moderator

Spystreak

The Grim Reaper

I'm only going to give this warning once, after that this thread gets the lock and warnings will be issued. KEEP IT CIVIL OR DON'T SAY ANYTHING AT ALL

I'm seriously tired of this crap. It's not a hard concept. If you don't have anything nice to say step away from your computer and walk away.

Fools You Can't Escape from The Grim Reaper. Your Only Chance for Escape Is Death. Bye Bye Now
Signature Image
Your Ignorance Will Be Your Own Downfall.

Science for sure, religion is a recipe for madness!

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

Back to Religion & Science | Active Threads | Forum Index

Only members can post replies, please register.

Warning: Undefined array key "cookienotice" in /var/www/minitokyo/www/html2/footer.html on line 73
This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Read more.