Religion. The evolution, creation and everything in between megathread

[mattnz]

nah - i was trying to understand how an all powerful god can fail at getting his point across - the christians are trying to argue that science is as vague as the bible

But once again you are thinking of it from a scientific perspective. I don't see any explicit indicator that people should live searching for knowledge rather than living according to the tenets of a deity.

[cobra]

But once again you are thinking of it from a scientific perspective. I don't see any explicit indicator that people should live searching for knowledge rather than living according to the tenets of a deity.

i agree with you mostly - one there are no explicit indicators for anything when you get to the heart of matters

the searching for knowledge is just a personal values, and part of that is i am anti-ignorance so will always post against any value system that promotes it

is the science group just some sort of trap?

[mattnz]

i agree with you mostly - one there are no explicit indicators for anything when you get to the heart of matters

the searching for knowledge is just a personal values, and part of that is i am anti-ignorance so will always post against any value system that promotes it

is the science group just some sort of trap?

Don't get me wrong, I like science, but I find questioning the motives of our species as a whole more satisfying. Just as you ask why we should believe in false gods, I think it's important for us to try and understand why we are seeking knowledge. It is not necessary, we have lived for tens of thousands of years at a lower level of knowledge, and it appears that our relentless quest for the truth has been at the expense of the wellbeing of our planet, so who are we to say that the religious sects promoting the past (even if that past is somewhat idealised) are wrong in the big scheme of things.

[cobra]

Don't get me wrong, I like science, but I find questioning the motives of our species as a whole more satisfying. Just as you ask why we should believe in false gods, I think it's important for us to try and understand why we are seeking knowledge. It is not necessary, we have lived for tens of thousands of years at a lower level of knowledge, and it appears that our relentless quest for the truth has been at the expense of the wellbeing of our planet, so who are we to say that the religious sects promoting the past (even if that past is somewhat idealised) are wrong in the big scheme of things.

i would claim that it is human greed that is contributing to the decline in the well being of the planet

here is a quote i prepared earlier

"you want to do evil, science provides the most powerful weapons to do evil; but equally, if you want to do good, science puts into your hands the most powerful tools to do so. The trick is to want the right things, then science will provide you with the most effective methods of achieving them." - Richard Dawkins

i can not answer why i value knowledge, (apart from disgusting reasons like utility) so you have a very strong point there

[mattnz]

Yes, I suppose capitalism shares the blame inasmuch as the first satisficing idea is immediately seized upon and marketed because econmically it will cost more in the long term to come up with a fully satisfying solution.

A combination effect I suppose. If only we had stuck to religious protocols regarding not lending money...

[ThaFleastyler]

as much fun as it was trawling through all the posts:

..... and I heard an audible voice that I couldn't attribute to anything other than God (if you want, I'll share the whole story, even though I'm sure I already have somewhere).....

... congratuwelldone!

So let me get this straight: from that one post, based on one single experience I had (from which I didn't surmise that God speaks to people on a regular basis, just that I believe He had spoken to me personally once) you concluded that I believe God told George Bush to go to Iraq? Maybe I also believe that God told David Koresh to have sex with the wives of all his followers, then lead them towards certain death at Waco? Maybe I believe God told Hitler to kill the jews, right?

Not to mention that the whole post (which you didn't share) was really to show that I think God can operate in peoples lives; sure, I heard an audible voice that I attribute to God - but only because I feel like it was God. Was it actually God? As the thread continues on to say further down that page, who can really know?!




Do I believe God guides people? Yes.

Do I believe God operates in peoples lives? Yes.

Do I believe that people can turn to God for guidance on specific issues? Yes.

Do I believe God told George W Bush to send the world into the next Stone Age by invading Iraq, resulting in the deaths of countless innocent people? No. No, I don't. And to be honest, I don't think George W Bush does either - was just a convenient excuse to get the war past the people.

[Dr Woomanchu]

The theory of relativity is extremely easy to disprove. All you have to do is make a prediction based on the theory and have it not happen. Again you show a misunderstanding of what science is about. If you are serious when you post on this subject then re-read Ducks posts on Popper in this thread somewhere.

[Dr Woomanchu]

But once again you are thinking of it from a scientific perspective. I don't see any explicit indicator that people should live searching for knowledge rather than living according to the tenets of a deity.

That's because there isn't one. If a world view that includes a supreme being of some sort works for you then fine. I prefer to derive my morals and ethics from within than without, but I have no problem with people looking to an external authority. For me this thread is about claims that a subjective world view has an objective reality.

If you wish to claim your god is objectively real then requests for some sort of measurable evidence are hardly unreasonable.

[cobra]

I've never said anything of the sort.

... congratuwelldone!

So let me get this straight: from that one post, based on one single experience I had (from which I didn't surmise that God speaks to people on a regular basis, just that I believe He had spoken to me personally once) you concluded that I believe God told George Bush to go to Iraq?

one thing i did do is prove that you are a liar - with evidence of lies - cold hard evidence

more my point is that why don't you believe that god talks to bush, his claim is as credible as yours with as much evidence as your claim and also the points about god failing at getting his point across - as far as all powerful beings go your one kinda fails

[UppityDuck]

Do I believe God guides people? Yes.

Do I believe God operates in peoples lives? Yes.

Do I believe that people can turn to God for guidance on specific issues? Yes.

How?

For me I'm inclined to think it's a psychological manifestation of an internal 'thought process', more akin to Woohoo's 'within' than the 'without'. I am, however, genuinely curious as to the perception of the 'without' with regards to the above quote.

[Bell]

In fact, lets play a fun game - how about the 'atheists' here start providing some proof that God definitively does not exist.

Out of all the arguments for religion, this one seems the most rediculous to me yet I have heard it everytime I have had a conversation with  a religious person.
( I have a habit of actually discussing religion with those door knockers lol).

The fact that you can't disprove something also means you can't prove it.

The spagetti monster is a good rebuttal of this.
Anyone could come up with totally rediculous idea that is totally unproveable by anyone.
I don't see how that gives a religion any validity.

Just because someone has labelled an idea as Religous does not give it a free pass.
People are free to believe is what they want, aslong as that belief does not come with practises which are detrimental to society.

What if I started a relgion in NZ which still believed that human sacrifice is the best way to apease the gods and insure a good harvest.
Would you sit back and say "Ahh that's ok he is free to believe in whatever he wants".
The reality of that is the reasoning for human sacrifice is the same as it is for praying.

If I really believed that the gods asked me to do that am I wrong?
You guys can't prove my practise is incorrect, should I be free to continue?
Or are you going to be bigots and perform some old fashioned religous persecution?

I know this is pretty much a non-issue in New Zealand but as we all know there are  some more extreme religions out there that are dangerous.
The thing is thier logic is just as valid as the more moderate religions.
Especially since you can't prove them wrong right?

[Who_ate_my_rice]

how can a woman as ugly and stupid as pauline hanson be created.

[mattnz]

That's because there isn't one. If a world view that includes a supreme being of some sort works for you then fine. I prefer to derive my morals and ethics from within than without, but I have no problem with people looking to an external authority. For me this thread is about claims that a subjective world view has an objective reality.

If you wish to claim your god is objectively real then requests for some sort of measurable evidence are hardly unreasonable.

So you would argue that science is more scientifically proveable than religion. Coolies!!! Do you think you're winning!?!?!?!

This debate must be about philosophy for it to actually be a debate. Think about why you value objective reality, and then think about why this is objectively better than believing anything else.

[KiLL3r]

But once again you are thinking of it from a scientific perspective. I don't see any explicit indicator that people should live searching for knowledge rather than living according to the tenets of a deity.

its called common sense and intelligence. 2 things of which you are severly lacking.

So you would argue that science is more scientifically proveable than religion. Coolies!!! Do you think you're winning!?!?!?!

100% spot on.


now can you try and bing something constructive to the argument as you seem to be repeating the same nonsense in all of your posts just worded slightly different

[ThaFleastyler]

one thing i did do is prove that you are a liar - with evidence of lies - cold hard evidence

Oh noes! A guy busted me on an internet forum!!!!1!!!!

For the record, my post was that I heard a voice which I attributed to God - not that God spoke to me directly - I mean, ffs, my exact quote is "I heard an audible voice that I couldn't attribute to anything other than God" - notice that little word "attribute"? Means that the conclusion that it may or may not have been God was mine, not that it was actually 100% God.

You know, this discussion would be a lot more fun if weren't trying to smear the people taking part, who don't agree with you, with under-handed tactics and out-of-context inferrences.

more my point is that why don't you believe that god talks to bush, his claim is as credible as yours with as much evidence as your claim and also the points about god failing at getting his point across - as far as all powerful beings go your one kinda fails

See above. Also, l2read.

[cobra]

Oh noes! A guy busted me on an internet forum!!!!1!!!!

For the record, my post was that I heard a voice which I attributed to God - not that God spoke to me directly - I mean, ffs, my exact quote is "I heard an audible voice that I couldn't attribute to anything other than God" - notice that little word "attribute"? Means that the conclusion that it may or may not have been God was mine, not that it was actually 100% God.

nice weaselling

You know, this discussion would be a lot more fun if weren't trying to smear the people taking part, who don't agree with you, with under-handed tactics and out-of-context inferrences.

flea - i wasn't going to post it but you keep goading me to so i did and i provided context, the link to the original post was provided for all who were interested - and i am not trying to "smear" you, you just got snapped as being dishonest with evidence to back it up

try arguing some points rather teh all you discussion about the discussion, you have really but forward any arguments or points

[ThaFleastyler]

If you notice, I did respond to some posts from Woohoo a page back.

Tbh, I prefer to deal with people who aren't attacking me with baseless arguments about what I didn't say, and I'm certainly not going to get into a "discussion" with someone who doesn't have any respect for me or my position (that would be you, btw).

In fact, why on earth am I still responding to you?

[mattnz]

its called common sense and intelligence. 2 things of which you are severly lacking.



100% spot on.


now can you try and bing something constructive to the argument as you seem to be repeating the same nonsense in all of your posts just worded slightly different

Every post I see of yours makes me more and more sure that you don't have a clue what you're on about.

You are not questioning enough, and therefore lack one of the foundations of science.

[UppityDuck]

I had a genuine question a page back.
Don't leave Flea, nil carborundum bastardo. I appreciate your input even if we disagree at times

[Retardobot]

nice weaselling

nice weaselling

[ThaFleastyler]

I had a genuine question a page back.
Don't leave Flea, nil carborundum bastardo. I appreciate your input even if we disagree at times

I'm not gonna leave entirely.

I'm just not responding to (what I view as) personal attacks from Cobra. His approach to the discussion is just pissing me off, and has for a while, to be honest.

[Dr Woomanchu]

So you would argue that science is more scientifically proveable than religion. Coolies!!! Do you think you're winning!?!?!?!

This debate must be about philosophy for it to actually be a debate. Think about why you value objective reality, and then think about why this is objectively better than believing anything else.

The problem with that is you're asking me to justify claims I haven't made.  

BTW I don't debate to "win", I debate to improve my understanding. I have no expectation of changing anybodies mind.

For example my contributions and the responses over the last  day or so have distilled a key point for me. What, if any, evidence or occurrence could convince you that your particular god didn't exist? Any scientific hypothesis or "belief" can be easily falsified, and I am genuinely curious if anyone here who genuinely believes in some sort of supreme deity can point to an occurrence or fact that would make them say " Oh, I was wrong, god doesn't objectively exist".

I live by my subjective experience of the universe. It includes a guy called Murphy, who generally fucks things up. I firmly believe that electronic equipment functions in inverse proportion to how well you need it to, that hubris will get you a faceplant, and that karma is  very real proposition.

The only real difference I can see between me and those who argue for gods is that I'm not arrogant enough to assume that my subjective view of the universe has objective reality. When I cease to exist, my reality goes with me. I find people who think their realities exist independently of themselves fascinating.

[mattnz]

The problem with that is you're asking me to justify claims I haven't made.  

BTW I don't debate to "win", I debate to improve my understanding. I have no expectation of changing anybodies mind.

For example my contributions and the responses over the last  day or so have distilled a key point for me. What, if any, evidence or occurrence could convince you that your particular god didn't exist? Any scientific hypothesis or "belief" can be easily falsified, and I am genuinely curious if anyone here who genuinely believes in some sort of supreme deity can point to an occurrence or fact that would make them say " Oh, I was wrong, god doesn't objectively exist".

I live by my subjective experience of the universe. It includes a guy called Murphy, who generally fucks things up. I firmly believe that electronic equipment functions in inverse proportion to how well you need it to, that hubris will get you a faceplant, and that karma is  very real proposition.

The only real difference I can see between me and those who argue for gods is that I'm not arrogant enough to assume that my subjective view of the universe has objective reality. When I cease to exist, my reality goes with me. I find people who think their realities exist independently of themselves fascinating.

I totally agree with you, I'm pretty sure my post earlier did say that I thought the downfall of many religions is that they try and argue to scientists that they have an objective basis. I just skipped out about 5500 posts, and assumed you were on the bandwagon.

[huey31415]

I heard an audible voice that I couldn't attribute to anything other than God

What did God sound like?
(This is a serious question; not trolling)

[brucewillis2]

what the fuck is happening in India. those damn religious nutters are at it again. Gang raping? where does it say that's ok in their religious teachings? murder? slaughter?

Yet another reason I don't like religion.