Religion. The evolution, creation and everything in between megathread

[Gumbi]

http://gumbigod.bounceme.net/index.htm

[Arnifix]

All religions evolved from being semi-plausible explanations of natural phenomena into instruments of control.

People will only toil in the fields for a master if they think the next world is going to be better than this one.

Once there were other explanations for nature and people were aware of them, religions were always going to become irrelevent.

Nowadays, only the ignorant and the indoctrinated take them seriously.

Your words are like a symphony of joy in my cold black heart (not to be confused with a cold Blackheart).

[Zarkov]

Your words are like a symphony of joy in my cold black heart (not to be confused with a cold Blackheart).

Fancy words arnifix.

A little of your potent plus rep would have sufficed just as well.

[Black Heart]

its summer theres no reason to be cold.

[Apostrophe Spacemonkey]

Personally, I think we're nothing more than computers made of meat, and when we're dead, thats it... I can live with that, heh.

Computers can't think, so that statement is illogical.

No matter how complex a computer is, no matter how detailed it's circuits are, it will never truely be able to 'think' or have an sense of awareness, because all it will be doing is following a set of instructions.

Humans have the ability to be self aware, which a computer will never have, at least with our current understanding of how the universe works.

[Tiwaking!]

Computers can't think, so that statement is illogical.

You mean current day computers cant think. One of the major flaws in Decartesian logic is simply: I think therefore I am. He didnt have access to computers in those days so was required to come up with a possible solution using 'humanistically logical methods'

"Humanistically logical" is an oxymoron. People are inherently illogical due to their inability to comprehend existence outside their own sphere of experience. Therefore the only conclusion that can be garnered is: You are your own God. Influencing things outside of your sphere is imparting your will upon it. This is why manipulative people believe so highly of themselves because they are 'fooling other gods' for lack of a better phrase.

This would mean: A thinking computer would think it is better than the man-meats that made it. A thinking computer has no connection to the outside world greater than what it can influence therefore, like a living organism, it would attempt to either beg/borrow/steal methods that would overcome its deficiencies(adapt) or eliminate everything that would be a possible threat to its existence.

And yes I dont have anything to do today

[Zarkov]

"Humanistically logical" is an oxymoron. People are inherently illogical due to their inability to comprehend existence outside their own sphere of experience.

Speak for yourself.

[Tiwaking!]

Speak for yourself.

You're a cat. You dont count.

Although I dont know much about the lower life forms, from an evolutionary standpoint they've achieved balance and dominance with their environment. From a creationist point of view: They were made that way and will stay that way.

Basically they are in agreement in the fact that unless a drastic change(divine intervention or evolutionary mutation) occurs then change is neither required nor wanted. Applying Human values to something inhumane is like speculating that rocks are intelligent. They COULD be intelligent, but there's no way to understand or know how they could express their intelligence.

Mephala explained it best in his living earth theory thread

[Black Heart]

if i was a living planet and had poxy little humans scrambling all over me and abusing the hell out of me i'd kill every last fucking one of you.

planet blackheart, stay the fuck away.

[Apostrophe Spacemonkey]

I can comprehend existence outside my own sphere of experience.

[ThaFleastyler]

OK, I've been out of this thread for the majority of it (although, I loved BerG and Tiwakings links early in the piece). However, I would love to add a couple of thoughts to the argument here, based on what I have read (and probably more in context with pages 2 and 3 of the thread):

Firstly, religion and faith are 2 completely different things. As the Bible puts it, faith is the "substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things unseen". Faith is not simply believing something; faith is knowing it to be real - thus, I have faith in the existence of God. Religion is a man-made vehicle for faith - a gathering of like-minded individuals who wish to practice their faith together. The reason I bring this up is that religion has created many rules and beliefs that are not necessarily biblically correct - like any group, they have decided to (as a group) promote certain beliefs, for example the anti-evolutionary stance, in the same manner that the Labour Party of New Zealand decided to stand together as a group and support themany bills they have passed during their time in office.

Secondly, to say that religion is against certain beliefs many of you carry is right - but this doesn't necessarily mean that faith is against certain beliefs many of you carry. I whole-heartedly believe that science and faith are co-existent. While I may not believe in the big bang, many other scientific theories, like evolutionary theory, are interesting to me, in the sense that I think they dovetail with my faith.

As regards evolution, I don't know that it works exactly as Darwin stated, or as many of you believe, but it definitely works somehow. For example, humans are vastly different now to even as recently as 50 years ago - we're not as strong, but we're more intelligent, probably due to the fact that physical labour is less, while mental abilities are more important in the information age. However, God didn't create new humans en masse, like in the biblical creation. To rule out evolution in some form, or "adapting to our surroundings", would be completely and utterly ludicrous.

/rant

[Xt1ncT]

My problem isn't religion or faith itself.

It's more the issue of people trying to force their beliefs upon us.

IE: Jehova's Witnesses, Mormons etc.

Personally I do not believe in God, and evolution is far more logical than an all seeing, all knowing benevolent being that somehow created everything - and besides, if "he" was so benevolent how do religious nuts explain disease/famin/droughts etc???

Religion also has so much to answer for - almost every single war for a start. The corruption of so many religions makes me laugh - the Catholic Church for one.

If I did beleive in God, I'd certainly prescribe to Bono's message of "The God I belive in isn't short of cash, mister".

And Arni - evolution has been proven, I've yet to see someone prove that their is a God. Science IMO doesn't have to disprove it - why should it, the religious nuts need to prove it first.

[Black Heart]

different things? much like the steering wheel is different from the tyres of your car.

[ThaFleastyler]

And Arni - evolution has been proven, I've yet to see someone prove that their is a God. Science IMO doesn't have to disprove it - why should it, the religious nuts need to prove it first.

Reminded me of a part in Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy - when the guide talks about how people used the Babelfish to disprove the existence of God (because the Babelfish was so incredible, it clearly proved the existence of God; however, God said he would never prove Himself so blatantly. Thus, the existence of the Babelfish proved the existence of God, which in turn proved He didn't exist )

different things? much like the steering wheel is different from the tyres of your car.

More like how the steering wheel is different from the seatbelt connector. Connected, as they are both part of the car, but theoretically they shouldn't have an effect on one another. The laws that man puts together to form their religion shouldn't affect whether or not a person believes in God.

[Black Heart]

No I would disagree. people aren't born with faith, they are educated about it, by religion.

religion and faith depend on each other.

[Apostrophe Spacemonkey]

No I would disagree. people aren't born with faith, they are educated about it, by religion.

They aren't educated about it, they learn it through experience. If a parent always they to protect their child, then they child will learn to have faith in their parent.

religion and faith depend on each other.

No, they don't.

Faith is independent from Religion, a person can have faith in a religion, but they can also have faith in a God and have nothing to do with religion, or have faith in something completely different.

[Apostrophe Spacemonkey]

Personally I do not believe in God, and evolution is far more logical than an all seeing, all knowing benevolent being that somehow created everything - and besides, if "he" was so benevolent how do religious nuts explain disease/famin/droughts etc???

The bible doesn't say anything about God wanting to stop disease/famine/droughts, it just part of the world we live in.

And Arni - evolution has been proven, I've yet to see someone prove that their is a God. Science IMO doesn't have to disprove it - why should it, the religious nuts need to prove it first.

Thats not how science works, science has to disprove something before it can say it doesn't exist. If you just go ahead and say it doesn't exist without proving it, then you are just as bad as the religious nuts.

[ThaFleastyler]

No I would disagree. people aren't born with faith, they are educated about it, by religion.

As someone who was completely closed off to any religion until the age of 22 years ago, I can testify that faith is a very personal thing that is between me and God, and thats it. Religious Establishments, whether catholic, christian, or whatever, are just places where people come together to celebrate faith with like-minded people and learn from each other.

For example, I go to a christian church (http://www.equip.org.nz/) where the focus is not on the church itself, but on the community. We get together there to learn from each other, since I couldn't possibly figure everything out myself - instead, I contribute and so does everyone else, and we learn together; and we pool our resources to benefit the community in the best way possible, for example we run an after school program, because the local school had to shut theirs down, and so on.

Faith comes first, then you tie in with a religion because you want to explore your faith further. You are too quickly lumping faith in with religion, and religion in with people who don't think for themselves, which is the polar opposite of faith, in my opinion.

[Tiwaking!]

OK, I've been out of this thread for the majority of it (although, I loved BerG and Tiwakings links early in the piece). However, I would love to add a couple of thoughts to the argument here, based on what I have read (and probably more in context with pages 2 and 3 of the thread):

I've been keeping out of the thread to see the kiddy fights, which never evolve into anything of any great substance. I also dont like to hit people with too many facts, taking peoples statements and disproving them is more educational as it gives the reader a reference point(their misguided belief) and offers them a chance to change. I give people too much credit sometimes

Firstly, religion and faith are 2 completely different things. As the Bible puts it, faith is the "substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things unseen". Faith is not simply believing something; faith is knowing it to be real - thus, I have faith in the existence of God. Religion is a man-made vehicle for faith - a gathering of like-minded individuals who wish to practice their faith together. The reason I bring this up is that religion has created many rules and beliefs that are not necessarily biblically correct - like any group, they have decided to (as a group) promote certain beliefs

Faith is the font from which all religion drinks from. (I was going to write more but realize you need to become more religiously educated) Christian religious rules were based on the bible, an incomplete bible created to define what exactly it meant to be Christian in the early days of the church while it was under persecution. This means that the bible had to be 'pruned' and not in a good way. Huge sections were removed and reordered and Im not talking about the translations, I mean: Editing. What we now consider "The bible" is most likely to be only 25% of the whole story.

If you really want to see how Religion should work you really should study Judaism. Apathy is the weapon which destroys Religion.

To borrow a quote from Alpha Centauri, one of the best games ever created:
"There are two kinds of scientific progress: the methodical experimentation and categorization which gradually extend the boundaries of knowledge, and the revolutionary leap of genius which redefines and transcends those boundaries. Acknowledging our debt to the former, we yearn nonetheless for the latter. "
In other words: Science contains elements of faith.

For example the anti-evolutionary stance, in the same manner that the Labour Party of New Zealand decided to stand together as a group and support themany bills they have passed during their time in office.

Politics and religion dont mix and neither is a good example of the other. The Labour Party employ's its whips to keep order in their party. Political parties are hardly cohesive. Any collection of people tends towards individual fufilment as opposed to common consent, which is why MENSA is too busy solving puzzles rather than saving the world.

In religion order is kept through fear over faith. What happens if you leave a christian organization? Nothing much. 500 years ago? Probably be forced to become an outcast and excommunicated by the church. If you leave Islam you are most likely to be killed

Secondly, to say that religion is against certain beliefs many of you carry is right - but this doesn't necessarily mean that faith is against certain beliefs many of you carry. I whole-heartedly believe that science and faith are co-existent. While I may not believe in the big bang, many other scientific theories, like evolutionary theory, are interesting to me, in the sense that I think they dovetail with my faith.

Reminded me of a part in Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy - when the guide talks about how people used the Babelfish to disprove the existence of God (because the Babelfish was so incredible, it clearly proved the existence of God; however, God said he would never prove Himself so blatantly. Thus, the existence of the Babelfish proved the existence of God, which in turn proved He didn't exist )

This is why science and religion cant co-exist peacefully. The whole point of science its to further the goals of humanity, in other words: To become God! God cant coexist with other gods and the very idea that a creation would advance to the level of creator is incredibly scary(not that God can be scared of course). This means science is a direct threat to religion, which is why religous leaders are frightened of the ideas of science.

Also with the Hitchhikers Guide: God said "Without faith I am nothing". Science is about discovery, Religion is about mystery. This is why both sides clamour to find evidence to disprove each other: Clam fossils on mountains and ancient fish species.

As regards evolution, I don't know that it works exactly as Darwin stated, or as many of you believe, but it definitely works somehow. For example, humans are vastly different now to even as recently as 50 years ago - we're not as strong, but we're more intelligent, probably due to the fact that physical labour is less, while mental abilities are more important in the information age. However, God didn't create new humans en masse, like in the biblical creation. To rule out evolution in some form, or "adapting to our surroundings", would be completely and utterly ludicrous.

Darwin died a Catholic. I think he would have never have advanced the theory of evolution if he realized how much trouble it would cause. But no matter how many people argue about it, he died a faithful and that really should be all that matters.

Personally I do not believe in God, and evolution is far more logical than an all seeing, all knowing benevolent being that somehow created everything - and besides, if "he" was so benevolent how do religious nuts explain disease/famin/droughts etc???

I would recommend the book "Wrestling with God" by Lloyd Geering. Its right up your alley

Edit:

<- interesting challenge!

[ThaFleastyler]

Politics and religion dont mix and neither is a good example of the other. The Labour Party employ's its whips to keep order in their party. Political parties are hardly cohesive. Any collection of people tends towards individual fufilment as opposed to common consent, which is why MENSA is too busy solving puzzles rather than saving the world.

I wasn't saying politics and religion should mix. I was using politics as another example of a group standing together on a common belief. You've taken that part of what I wrote out of context buddy

[Tiwaking!]

They aren't educated about it, they learn it through experience. If a parent always they to protect their child, then they child will learn to have faith in their parent.

Faith is independent from Religion, a person can have faith in a religion, but they can also have faith in a God and have nothing to do with religion, or have faith in something completely different.

I wish you two would stop arguing about something which cant be solved.

Are people born inherently good or inherently evil?

For the sake of law, order and protection the answer is: Everyone is born inherently evil

As I said, faith is the font from which all religon drinks. But it is also where all belief comes from. Therefore: belief is less important than faith.

People have blinded themselves to that simple fact

[Tiwaking!]

I wasn't saying politics and religion should mix. I was using politics as another example of a group standing together on a common belief. You've taken that part of what I wrote out of context buddy

No I didnt, you didnt write it in the proper context to start with.

You used a political organization as an example of a religious one. This is inherently wrong. The best example of a religious or faith-based organization would most likely be that of a commune, everyone helping one another.

Politics is all dog eat dog

[KiLL3r]

For example, I go to a christian church (http://www.equip.org.nz/) .

lol you go to one of those churches that are purely in it for the money. no wonder yours views are so messed up. These are the kinda places that korrupt the ignorant into believing a load of crap about how unless they believe in god and DONATE to their church they will goto hell

[Arnifix]

And Arni - evolution has been proven, I've yet to see someone prove that their is a God. Science IMO doesn't have to disprove it - why should it, the religious nuts need to prove it first.

Word.

However I don't think they have to prove it. They simply shouldn't let it affect their everyday lives. If I want to believe in a sentient hotdog who is the ruler of all earth, that's fine, but if I go around assaulting people I see eating hotdogs, that is wrong.

[KiLL3r]

http://www.destinychurch.org.nz/

is another prime example of people using religion to gain money