The Problem with Science as a Substitute

[nereas]

...

and I thought I was the one that was going to be bad and get banned for rescuscitating the religeon vs. demon worshipers thread?

I am starting to really like you, nereas. Remind me to be polite on my best manners from now on.

All I got to say is, Kudos, mate!....but beware of the hammer of Rick. I dare not even think to mess with him. You got some big cahones.


Post Post Note: Maybe the K is the moderator here. Yeah, don't mess with him either.

AXL, I really liked your "BANNED" avatar the best, of all the ones that you are using. You are not on my mute list, so you must have been quite polite before.

If you are atheist, which was the impression I got before, then that is fine with me. You just need to understand that atheism is actually a form of religion in an of itself, by being a personal choice not to follow any religion. And that is fine. I respect your right to be atheist, or anything else that you choose.

You are free (unless you happen to live in North Korea, in which case you would not be free, unfortunately).

 

[AXL72]

. ...atheism is actually a form of religion in an of itself.....

I agree. That is the irony of atheism. It being almost like an organized religeon is just another lil chuckle that gets me through my day.

Do I care about the irony? No. The beauty is that atheists pay the least dollar amount in terms of tithings and the "basket"...and we don't have to show up and deal with eachother on Sunday mornings:mooner:

 

[nereas]

... The beauty is that atheists pay the least dollar amount in terms of tidings and the "basket"...

Interesting thought, about money.

Jesus said to render to Ceasar that which is Ceasars, and to (G)od that which is (G)od's. (It is written in ancient Greek, of course, originally.)

Therefore the law of tithing does not bother me. I do not miss the 1/10th.

And the advice about paying your taxes makes perfectly good sense as well.

The psalms of David, the proverbs of Solomon, and the parables of Jesus all contain excellent ethics to live by. They are a form of philosophy which draws from the given that there will ultimately be a judgment and an afterlife, and thus this life is the time to prepare to meet our own individual (G)od. It is not bad advice.

Science alone contains no ethics. And philosophy only argues endlessly about ethics.

 

[AXL72]

I do not miss the 1/10th.

Would you miss another 1/10th if you gave it to me?

 

[nereas]

Would you miss another 1/10th if you gave it to me?

I think I could spare a hamburger, fries, and a coke if you were a homeless person.

I normally do not give cash to the poor.

 

[Noboundaries]

I wrote in an earlier post When each of us arrives at that point of our own transition when our bodies cease to function, you'll be shocked at how simple the goal of life really is and how insignificant discussions, beliefs, and affiliations truly are.

OK, so are you going to tell us?

Sure, I'll share.

When you die you'll have a life review. This is a common experience among those whose heart has stopped and were later resuscitated. You'll understand that your existance is an incredible gift and that you made an astronomical number of decisions while you were on Earth. As you review each moment of your life from birth to death from a third party perspective, there will be only one question for you to contemplate. Putting that infinitely loving question into language is near impossible, but it will revolve around your contribution to the lives of those you touched and if you fully embraced and applied who you are without limitation.

Basically the only two life pursuits that encompass all one's efforts are Love and Knowledge. The goal is creation. So this infinitely loving question really focuses on what you created with your gift of existance. You'll feel what your actions created in others, in yourself, and the results of the ripples of those feelings as they expanded, touching life upon life. You'll view with perfect clarity what your personal creations accomplished. Whether a book, business, offspring, church or crime, you'll understand exactly what you created, its value and effect on others. You'll understand where you fell short and where you excelled. Contrary to many beliefs there will be no condemnation of you or your actions, only perfect understanding and clarity.

Science is the synonym for the pursuit of knowledge. Religion is the synonym for the pursuit of Love. Creation is the result of both.

And Philosophy? That is one's attempt to understand it all.

 

[sandmanz32]

Oh No Not Again!! Didnt The Mods Close The Last Argue Fest.

 

[Plumb bob]

You just need to understand that atheism is actually a form of religion in an of itself, by being a personal choice not to follow any religion.

So for you everyone is religious? If I say that I don't follow religion and don't believe in any gods you'd just say that, that is my choice of religion in doing so?

I wish I had the time and energy to argue this and many other of the (in my opinion you understand) overly self confident proclamations you have made... But i'm afraid that your obvious love of circular arguments would prove counterproductive.

But good luck, maybe a more tolerant or less busy atheist will take you up on the offer, but not me uh uh, no way I gotta go and ah... ah... recite the periodic table 50 times before bed, lest I forever burn in the hell of ignorance

 

[Sas]

That thread started out as someone saying how much they love Jesus, and then getting blasted by a lot of atheists pretending to be scientists and saying how much they loved science books, and how science books prove there cannot be any god(s).

The point of this thread is quite different.

No, that is not how that thread started. Here is the OP

I was just wondering how many people out there believe in "Creation" and how many people believe in "Evolution." I would just like some feed back. Please keep comments polite and be respectable to other people's comments.

Personally, I believe in Creation. I was raised round church but never really paid any attention. So, I use to believe in Evolution, but now I believe in Creation due to the fact I became saved. In my opinion, I think evolution is no good. Anytime a scientist can not figure out when something walked this earth, they say something like "Fourhunderd Million Years Ago." Now come on! How old do people think the world really is. I think the world is only six - seven thousand years old. Most evolutionist, not all, believe in the big bang theroy. Now, what caused the big bang? Is it so hard to believe that maybe a higher being, "God" as we all call him, created us. Not everything can be explained with facts, sometimes we have to have FAITH.

That' my opinion. I have a lot more to say, but for time sake I kept it short and vague. I just want to see what you all have to say.

So you can see that A. this person did not say anything about how they love Jesus and B. They dismissed the science of evolution. Please make sure you have your facts straight, before posting a comment like this nereas as it reflects poorly on the rest of your arguments if you post something that is blatantly false.

Now to relate that back to this thread. This person said that the world is 6000-7000 years old. ALL reputable scientific evidence is to the contrary. So, when there is a conflict between actual evidence that one can go out and research and confirm themselves, and what the Bible (or any other religious text or religion says), then I think science is right and the religious idea wrong. When has there been a scientific idea that has lost out to something in the Bible as far as evidence goes?

Moving along though, as far as I am concerned, religion and science are not incompatible at all, if they stick to what they are defined as (just a dictionary definition here but it carries the point of what they are supposed to be):

Science - systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.

Religion - system of belief in, and worship of, a supernatural power or god/s

So, religion cannot ever prove its ideas because of the fact it concerns itself with something that is not measurable or observable, and science cannot disprove the ideas of religion precisely because they are not measurable or observable. I.e evolution is observable and measurable so it is within the realm of science and religious people should drop their ideas that directly contradict this such as an original creator as they are not provable (but may be correct - no one currently can prove whether there was an original creator or not, this is something that both sides should realise)

I consider myself an atheist, even though I don't believe I can disprove God, as I see God as being completely unnecessary for the world around me. The existence of human kind is explained fairly adequately by science (with the exception of the original formation of life on Earth - but I expect this to be answered in my lifetime).

Also regarding near death experiences, well there is a perfectly logical and scientific explanation for the experiences people get at a time like that. They've been able to recreate the "religious" feeling people get when their brain is deprived of oxygen (like what one experiences in a near death experience) in a significant percentage of fighter pilots in high G forces and as well as subjecting people to other scenarios (generally induced by drugs) that simulate near death.

 

[The Kraken]

I think I could spare a hamburger, fries, and a coke if you were a homeless person.

I normally do not give cash to the poor.

Neither do I, but that came back and bit me in the butt one time.

Was down in New Orleans when this, evidently homless, guy came up and tried to bum some money, said he was "hungry".

Told him I wouldn't give him any cash, but that I'd take him to that McDonald's right over there and get him something to eat . . . should have given him $2.

That guy ate 2 Big Macs, 3 orders of fries and a milk shake.

Oh well . . . at least he wasn't hungry for a while.

the K