What is the one true faith (or lack thereof)?

[gwprod12]

I should have specified that I was asking James2mart.

[wildcat69410]

I should have specified that I was asking James2mart.

 

I'm sorry, I often jump in like that.

 

Just ignore me then, lol.

 

[cyrana]

Interesting quote from DARWIN HIMSELF in The Origin of Species:

 

"To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree."

 

So killbot1000, since you say the eye evolved, but DARWIN doesn't, please tell us EXACTLY how the eye evolved, because it certainly wasn't natural selection.

 

And while we're at it, show me ONCE in recorded history of science where life has been created from non-life. Theoretically, the big bang produced non-living matter. Where did the living matter come from? Hmm?

I thought humans were supposedly created in God's image? If so, why do we not have the best eyes on the planet. You'd think we would at least all be tetrachromes or something. hehe.

 

Darwin was working with some really old data, btw. Science is based on what we know, and since we're always learning more things, our observations based on facts obviously change.

 

Just because I don't know the answer to something doesn't mean I have to start believing in magic or some nonsense, either. Anyway, I'm not an atheist or anything, just arguing (I'm one of those evil deists ).

[wildcat69410]

I thought humans were supposedly created in God's image? If so, why do we not have the best eyes on the planet. You'd think we would at least all be tetrachromes or something. hehe.

 

Yes, we're created in God's image, not exactly like him. He created people who were similar to him, not exact copies of himself. Imagine 7 billion ominipotent all powerful gods running around, haha. So God didn't want to create perfect humans incapable of mistake, because when you create perfection, you're limiting choice. There's only one way to be perfect (in a literal sense), and that's to do everything right. If he were to do that, then we'd lose our free choice, something God didn't want. He just guided us.

 

Darwin was working with some really old data, btw. Science is based on what we know, and since we're always learning more things, our observations based on facts obviously change.

 

Even still, science hasn't been able to explain the evolution of the eye. It's still the same old, light sensitive pits which could possibly evolve later into eyes. There's been no proof, and no experiments, nothing. Even still, where did these light sensitive pits come from? Evolution on a molecular or biological level at this point science cannot effectively explain.

 

Just because I don't know the answer to something doesn't mean I have to start believing in magic or some nonsense, either. Anyway, I'm not an atheist or anything, just arguing (I'm one of those evil deists wink_anim.gif).

 

Of course not, we're not saying something like that. But if you look at the odds evolution presents, and the insanity of it all, it really comes to a point where it just becomes scientifically implausible. In the end, it all becomes a leap of faith, towards whatever you want to believe in. If you wish to believe in evolution, then that leap of faith involves ignoring massive gaps in fossil evidence and theory. If it means believing in creation, then it means ignoring massive gaps in creationism and a large lack of evidence.

 

It's up to you, but my choice is fairly obvious.

[killbot1000]

Yes, we're created in God's image, not exactly like him. He created people who were similar to him, not exact copies of himself. Imagine 7 billion ominipotent all powerful gods running around, haha. So God didn't want to create perfect humans incapable of mistake, because when you create perfection, you're limiting choice. There's only one way to be perfect (in a literal sense), and that's to do everything right. If he were to do that, then we'd lose our free choice, something God didn't want. He just guided us.

Even still, science hasn't been able to explain the evolution of the eye. It's still the same old, light sensitive pits which could possibly evolve later into eyes. There's been no proof, and no experiments, nothing. Even still, where did these light sensitive pits come from? Evolution on a molecular or biological level at this point science cannot effectively explain.

Of course not, we're not saying something like that. But if you look at the odds evolution presents, and the insanity of it all, it really comes to a point where it just becomes scientifically implausible. In the end, it all becomes a leap of faith, towards whatever you want to believe in. If you wish to believe in evolution, then that leap of faith involves ignoring massive gaps in fossil evidence and theory. If it means believing in creation, then it means ignoring massive gaps in creationism and a large lack of evidence.

 

It's up to you, but my choice is fairly obvious.

 

 

The eye isnt actually as complex as you think it is, its really just a sack of liquid that acts as a lense attached to a nerve, I really dont see the amazing wonder here...

 

 

Also, this world isnt bad....The only reason why this world is bad is because we make it that way. Somehow in christianity, people got the message that everything worldly was inherently bad and everything otherworldly was inherently good, I think this really is the wrong way to look at the world.

 

Dont you see that we can MAKE this world a better place, just by being kind human beings? Nobody knows what happens to them after they die, I reapeat NOBODY, this is the only life we have FOR SURE, and whats wrong with using our life to make the world a better place, to make the world good, not bad.

 

I dont see a problem in it, whether youre religious or not, the world will only end if we will it to end, its not out of our control, despite that fact that we think it is...

[gwprod12]

By the way. the quote:

 

To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.

 

is only the first part of what Darwin actually said. The rest is:

 

Yet reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist; if further, the eye does vary ever so slightly, and the variations be inherited, which is certainly the case; and if any variation or modification in the organ be ever useful to an animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, can hardly be considered real. How a nerve comes to be sensitive to light, hardly concerns us more than how life itself first originated; but I may remark that several facts make me suspect that any sensitive nerve may be rendered sensitive to light, and likewise to those coarser vibrations of the air which produce sound.

 

"God made it that way" is the universal battlecry of the intentionally ignorant.

[Ouch]

"Nobody made it that way" is the universal battlecry of the intentionally arrogant.

[gwprod12]

How does a disbelief in god make someone arrogant?

[Ouch]

How does belief in God make somebody ignorant? It's arrogance to assume that the scientific answer is the only possible explanation, to be unwilling to acknowledge the possibility that the science could be wrong and to call the countless billions of people people who do believe in a higher power ignorant.

[gwprod12]

Belief in god doesnt make you ignorant.

 

Answer this question. "Why is the sky blue?"

 

If your answer is "Because god wants it that way", I think my point is clear.

[killbot1000]

Throughout human history people have used the excuse of god FOR EVERYTHING, as time has gone on, weve discovered the REAL scientific answers to these questions, its only a matter of time before we uncover more answers, All im saying is "dont assume god until every other possible option is exausted, and even then, question further". Not believing in god does not make somebody ignorant, if anything it makes them less ignorant for not being able to accept a generic blanket statement of "oh god did it", if we relied on that all throughout history, we would be nowhere today!

[wildcat69410]

Throughout human history people have used the excuse of god FOR EVERYTHING, as time has gone on, weve discovered the REAL scientific answers to these questions, its only a matter of time before we uncover more answers, All im saying is "dont assume god until every other possible option is exausted, and even then, question further". Not believing in god does not make somebody ignorant, if anything it makes them less ignorant for not being able to accept a generic blanket statement of "oh god did it", if we relied on that all throughout history, we would be nowhere today!

 

People have not used God as an excuse for everything! Sure, some of your Greek and Roman religions blamed bad acts on the dislike of a God, but people don't use it as an excuse. Sure, science has discovered some of these answers, but what about how people have used Religion to treat people better, to learn to value people's lives better. What has science done to "remedy" that? Religion isn't just a classic, I don't know so it must be God, it is used to uplift the human spirit and teach people values that need to be learned.

 

And on ignorance, to use a rather overly used quote, "Who is more ignorant, the one who cannot define lightning, or the one who does not respect its awesome power?"

[killbot1000]

People have not used God as an excuse for everything! Sure, some of your Greek and Roman religions blamed bad acts on the dislike of a God, but people don't use it as an excuse. Sure, science has discovered some of these answers, but what about how people have used Religion to treat people better, to learn to value people's lives better. What has science done to "remedy" that? Religion isn't just a classic, I don't know so it must be God, it is used to uplift the human spirit and teach people values that need to be learned.

 

And on ignorance, to use a rather overly used quote, "Who is more ignorant, the one who cannot define lightning, or the one who does not respect its awesome power?"

 

 

Science is different than religion, thats my point, you dont take a scientific subject like Lightening and apply it to religion, thats just...well, dumb.

 

One can look at the world in two different ways (at the same time I might add), one can define the lightening and respect its awesome power, but it has nothing to do with god, just respect of awesome power, ignorance is when evidence is stabbing you in the face and you choose to ignore it anyway, thats ignorance!

[wildcat69410]

Science is different than religion, thats my point, you dont take a scientific subject like Lightening and apply it to religion, thats just...well, dumb.

 

One can look at the world in two different ways (at the same time I might add), one can define the lightening and respect its awesome power, but it has nothing to do with god, just respect of awesome power, ignorance is when evidence is stabbing you in the face and you choose to ignore it anyway, thats ignorance!

 

No... You don't understand me.

 

You keep going on that Science is answering everything, and that all will eventually end the need for Religion. Religion, in your mind, was just used to answer questions that we had no idea to answer. I'm saying that that isn't right, that Science in no way can eventually replace religion.

 

By my ignorance quote, I mean that the most important thing in life isn't just the answers that science provides. For example, is it more important to know exactly how lightning is caused, the electrical forces involved, the discharge of lightning OR respecting the awesome power God has created with the Lightning bolt (no, I'm not talking Zeus type smiting or anything, lol). My biggest issue is that science type people keep on calling religious people ignorant for ignoring all of these scientific facts in the claim of a God. However, I think that they can be just as ignorant for not respecting the apparent power of God.

 

I think that's sort of the misunderstanding there...

[gwprod12]

There's a fundemental misunderstanding. God and Religion have their place, and Science has it's.

 

Religion and philosophy exist to construct the moral or ethical framework of people's lives. They dont exist to explain natural phenomena. (One of the problems with religion itself is that it attempts to explain natural phenomena in a way that is counterintuitive and rediculous to many people)

 

Science exists to explain nature, to construct a framework for future observation and practical use. It doesnt exist to explain how people act, or what the meaning of their life is.

 

The problem I have is mixing these things. If you've ever dealt with physical objects, you know that interacting with them by your own senses is the only way to deal with them on a rational or even effective basis. That's all I'm saying. "Because God made it that way" is a trite and useless answer to serious questions.

[wildcat69410]

"Because God made it that way" is a trite and useless answer to serious questions.

 

Depends on what you call serious questions. I believe a serious question involves stuff like, "Why are we here? ", or, "What is our goal, what are we supposed to accomplish?". Science can't exactly explain that, can it, and I don't see that answer to be trite and useless to my mentioned questions.

[gwprod12]

You make my head hurt.

 

I thought I was being clear. I guess I wasnt. Science cant answer the question "What is the meaning of life?". Science also cannot answer the question "How many angels can stand on the head of a pin".

 

But religion cannot answer the question "How much 15% alcohol solution must I mix with 20% alcohol solution in order to have 30 liters of 18% alcohol solution". Or "What is a star made of?" or "Why is there a night and a day?" Those are rational questions with rational answers.

 

Which is the better answer?

"There is night and day because of a chariot with a lamp that races across the heavens"

or

"The earth revolves around it's axis every twenty-four hours. Because of this, the sun is only visible part of the day"

[killbot1000]

You make my head hurt.

 

I thought I was being clear. I guess I wasnt. Science cant answer the question "What is the meaning of life?". Science also cannot answer the question "How many angels can stand on the head of a pin".

 

But religion cannot answer the question "How much 15% alcohol solution must I mix with 20% alcohol solution in order to have 30 liters of 18% alcohol solution". Or "What is a star made of?" or "Why is there a night and a day?" Those are rational questions with rational answers.

 

Which is the better answer?

"There is night and day because of a chariot with a lamp that races across the heavens"

or

"The earth revolves around it's axis every twenty-four hours. Because of this, the sun is only visible part of the day"

 

 

Damn right, thats what I was trying to say, I guess im just not as articulate as you hehehe

[wildcat69410]

I thought I was being clear. I guess I wasnt. Science cant answer the question "What is the meaning of life?". Science also cannot answer the question "How many angels can stand on the head of a pin".

 

But religion cannot answer the question "How much 15% alcohol solution must I mix with 20% alcohol solution in order to have 30 liters of 18% alcohol solution". Or "What is a star made of?" or "Why is there a night and a day?" Those are rational questions with rational answers.

 

Well of course! Science and Religion are two completely different things! I'm not suggesting we start to compare them, and treat them as equals. My point is that you can't treat Science as Religion. The most important answers in the Universe aren't what you need to mix to get an alcoholic solution, or what is the chemical composition in a star. There are bigger questions in life with bigger answers than computational mathematical forumlas, and a long listing of elements.

 

If rational questions were all that were asked in life, then we wouldn't have need for religion. But we are human beings with human wants and needs. Some of those needs involve wanting to know our true origin, our true meaning, our true purpose in life. Answers that Science cannot begin to explain. I understand completely that Religion cannot rationally explain anything, but I want you to understand that not everything on this Earth or in the Universe IS rational.

 

Which is the better answer?

"There is night and day because of a chariot with a lamp that races across the heavens"

or

"The earth revolves around it's axis every twenty-four hours. Because of this, the sun is only visible part of the day"

 

Well seeing as that's a rational question, I'd say the rational answer. Duh.

 

But what is the better answer here?

 

"Our purpose in life is to live through our life expectancy, while naturally reproducing to create an off-spring that will carry our genetic traits through the ages to the next generation, and then decomposing into the earth so that other biochemical organisms can survive."

 

or

 

"Our purpose in life is to fulfill God's Purpose, spread his word, and live a Christian Life. Using God's gifts to help spread the word of Jesus Christ and his salvation to the masses."

 

Irrational questions require apparently irrational answers.

 

P.S. I feel really outnumbered here, lol. There's got to be somebody here who understands what I'm talking about. Jump in, right now I'm getting tag-teamed by Killbot and gwprod.

[killbot1000]

Well of course! Science and Religion are two completely different things! I'm not suggesting we start to compare them, and treat them as equals. My point is that you can't treat Science as Religion. The most important answers in the Universe aren't what you need to mix to get an alcoholic solution, or what is the chemical composition in a star. There are bigger questions in life with bigger answers than computational mathematical forumlas, and a long listing of elements.

 

If rational questions were all that were asked in life, then we wouldn't have need for religion. But we are human beings with human wants and needs. Some of those needs involve wanting to know our true origin, our true meaning, our true purpose in life. Answers that Science cannot begin to explain. I understand completely that Religion cannot rationally explain anything, but I want you to understand that not everything on this Earth or in the Universe IS rational.

Well seeing as that's a rational question, I'd say the rational answer. Duh.

 

But what is the better answer here?

 

"Our purpose in life is to live through our life expectancy, while naturally reproducing to create an off-spring that will carry our genetic traits through the ages to the next generation, and then decomposing into the earth so that other biochemical organisms can survive."

 

or

 

"Our purpose in life is to fulfill God's Purpose, spread his word, and live a Christian Life. Using God's gifts to help spread the word of Jesus Christ and his salvation to the masses."

 

Irrational questions require apparently irrational answers.

 

P.S. I feel really outnumbered here, lol. There's got to be somebody here who understands what I'm talking about. Jump in, right now I'm getting tag-teamed by Killbot and gwprod.

 

I think the first answer is better

[kday]

ummm.... why care?

[Ouch]

Belief in god doesnt make you ignorant.

 

Answer this question. "Why is the sky blue?"

 

If your answer is "Because god wants it that way", I think my point is clear.

 

That depends what you mean by the word why - in the infinite sense science can't answer any of those questions. I would argue that "Because god wants it that way" is a perfectly acceptable answer to the question "Why is the sky blue?". Science can only tell you how the sky appears blue. But i'm glad you don't think anyone who believes in God is ignorant. ANyway i'm arguing symantics now so i'll stop.

[killbot1000]

That depends what you mean by the word why - in the infinite sense science can't answer any of those questions. I would argue that "Because god wants it that way" is a perfectly acceptable answer to the question "Why is the sky blue?". Science can only tell you how the sky appears blue. But i'm glad you don't think anyone who believes in God is ignorant. ANyway i'm arguing symantics now so i'll stop.

 

 

I dont think everybody who believes in god is ignorant, I think people who ignore scientific evidence because they like their god answer better, are ignorant.

 

If theres no natural explanation, go ahead, say its god

 

but if there is one, dont pretend its god, when its really science.

[wildcat69410]

I dont think everybody who believes in god is ignorant, I think people who ignore scientific evidence because they like their god answer better, are ignorant.

 

If theres no natural explanation, go ahead, say its god

 

but if there is one, dont pretend its god, when its really science.

 

You missed his point. Science can tell us how the sky is blue, what light waves are diffracted due to the atmosphere, and how those lightwaves enter our eyes and tell us that the sky is blue. But why the sky is blue, why it all happens that way, can be answered by "because god wants it that way".

 

Science, in my opinion, can only explain how. God is why.

[kernalzero]

'god' has always been used as the explanation and rationalisation for things that are unknown or unexplainable during the time of questioning. I won't cite the instances but just think about global history.

 

I work in medicine and outside of the clergy and church I'm not sure there's a place where people look to their spirituality and religion for answers and guidance. Never once have I told a sick patient or a patient with a terminal illness that it's god's doing. I'm sure as hell not going to blame science for their illness either (unless it's actually warranted). God isn't why good people get sick, he's not why anyone gets sick. Some times things just happen that can't be explained and won't be explained in our lifetimes. Just think 50 years ago they were just starting to learn about DNA...what will we see 50 years from now?

 

I like how Plato put it because it's true and this discussion will never end because through each of our own personal experiences we will each have a different perception and perspective of everything in our environments.

"Man - a being in search of meaning." - Plato

 

I think a deeper philosophical question than why is the sky blue would be: Do we as humans have a greater purpose for being 'alive' to serve humanity or do we just exist for no other reason but the fact that billions of years ago some biochemical reaction in a puddle of goo turned out to produce what we see outside and what we think inside? At the root of it all thoughts are mearly chemical reactions between individual cells...