There's a great chapter inThe God Delusionthat talks about why religion can't coexist with science. I'm too tired to remember it, perhaps someone more awake could summarize -_- z z z
Einstein himself believed very differently.
"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind."
But then again Einstein could not tie his own shoes. ; )
This is an example of an argumentum ad verecundiam logical fallacy -- an appeal to the beliefs of a famous person, or an appeal to the intelligence of another as proof of an unrelated argument.
Never claimed there was not a flying S'ketty monster ;), you have the right to worship Mickey Mouse if you want and I have no right to tell you otherwise. My point is that I as a Christian do follow science, I am not here to dash any one's beliefs or make you believe mine. Science is the study and understanding of the Material, Religious faith is a Spiritual issue. Faith is not about material proof, I gained my faith from looking at myself and from the experiences of my life, no Preacher, Priest, or anyone else turned me to Christianity. My family never once tried to influence me religiously or politically, they taught me good values and let me decide the latter for myself, and in suit that's the stance I take on such things.
There are chapters in the God Delusion that you should read. I'm too lazy to dig out the book or find a quote somewhere, but let's just say that it entirely crushes you and move on with our lives, eh?
The BBC Radio 4 program In Our Time did an episode recently on "Common Sense Philosophy." In it, one of the panelists (I forget who) mentioned that David Hume (who happens to have been anti-Atheist, and therefore makes this statement a very big deal) stated that there were no good arguments for the proof of the existence of God.
Even as a Christian, I have to say that I agree. But then again, according to most Christians, I'm not one of them.
I'm not quite sure where you're getting the idea that Hume was anti-athiest. People can argue whether he was actually an atheist or just a deist, but I think its hard to say such a noted sceptic and the person who wrote "Of Superstition and Religion" was a religious apologist.
Everyone keeps saying you can't prove the existence of God. Can you prove God doesn't exist? Did he truly disappear in a poof of logic? :P
Anyway, my two cents are as follows: I have no problem believing that a greater being created all that I see around me, it keeps me from losing my mind wondering where everything came from. I do take exception to the Bible as the WORD of God in any format....it's just a strange story if you ask me.
Everyone keeps saying you can't prove the existence of God. Can you prove God doesn't exist?
"Burden of Proof." The negative wins by default in this case. ^_~
Everyone keeps saying you can't prove the existence of God. Can you prove God doesn't exist? Did he truly disappear in a poof of logic? :P
Go listen to the GeekNights episode on Burden of Proof before you continue in these religious debates.
I have no problem believing that a greater being created all that I see around me, it keeps me from losing my mind wondering where everything came from.
So, you'd rather just take a simple answer to the creation of the world than a scientifically and evidence supported, yet "complex" one?
I have no problem believing that a greater being created all that I see around me, it keeps me from losing my mind wondering where everything came from.
So, you'd rather just take a simple answer to the creation of the world than a scientifically and evidence supported, yet "complex" one?
So you have scientific evidence for the creation of the world out of nothingness? Interesting... In any event, I would rather take the simple answer if for no other reason than I have better things to spend my time thinking about. Like what to make for dinner tomorrow night.
It applies to the side making the extraordinary claim. That episode should cover everything.
So you have scientific evidence for the creation of the world out of nothingness?
Hey, don't put a Straw Man in my place! I never said that science supports a theory that the universe came from virtually nothing. That would be the claim of the "God Hypothesis". Science generally supports the Big Bangtheory. The supporting evidence being, in short, a constantly expanding universe and the kinds of matter we are fairly sure existed at the beginning of the universe. The evidence for the "God Hypothesis" as a testable claim, on the other hand, being nill. See Neito's link about interstellar teapots.
I can't fault you much for actively choosing to not think about the beginnings of the universe, but I must say that I could never stand to live with that lack of curiosity you appear to have.
I'll give Burden of Proof a listen today. Still...I'd say the extraordinary claim is based on perspective...as far as someone who is religious is concerned the fact that one could possibly NOT believe in God is extraordinary. I'd say that is why religious debates are rather pointless in the first place, although this one has been rather fun since I decided to play devil's advocate.
Posted By: raquorI can't fault you much for actively choosing to not think about the beginnings of the universe, but I must say that I could never stand to live with that lack of curiosity you appear to have.
It's not a lack of curiousity...I perfectly understand the big bang theory and all of that, it seems like a logical way of explaining things based on the other information we can derive. Still, the matter that banged had to come from somewhere...didn't it? Even crazier is the thought or wonder of where it will all go eventually? Science explains that everything is expanding but I believe they've also said that at some point it will begin contracting again. It just blows my mind to think about the vastness of space and everything out there.
Was there more than one big bang? It seems rather short sighted to think that the universe that we see can be so large but only limit it to what we can see. So perhaps there are other galaxies and such expanding towards us? It's absolutely insane, yet there is still the vastness of space...how can it go on forever...what was there before? Was it a giant unending whiteness instead of a giant unending blackness? I'm afraid my mind can't comprehend such things and so I usually stop after thinking for a bit and just accept that there are some things that I cannot know, things that were perhaps created by some higher power. (Of course than I have to wonder where the higher power came from, but I figure if I'm going to accept the higher power thing than I may as well accept his continued existence time immemorial.)
I'd say I don't accept the savior bit but that's rather ingrained from my upbringing and I'm not entirely sure anyway. I do find that for the most part organized religion is irrational and involves very little thought. So as I continue to experience things and wonder about things I apply what I know to what I believe and vice versa and if science wins out fantastic, that doesn't bother me in the least. If God wins out...well...that's fairly rare, and I don't know that I'd quantify him/it as God at this point in my life.
Besides, what's life without a bit of magic and a few Gods? It's like a cake with no frosting.
Was there more than one big bang? It seems rather short sighted to think that the universe that we see can be so large but only limit it to what we can see. So perhaps there are other galaxies and such expanding towards us? It's absolutely insane, yet there is still the vastness of space...how can it go on forever...what was there before?
...You don't seem to realize that all of those questions are part and parcel to the theories of the origin of our universe, and that scientists do in fact consider them.
Questioning them is one thing. Putting forth an answer to the question is another. Accepting an answer for which there is zero evidence is sheer foolishness.
If science wins out fantasticScience has already won, in effect. Nothing in the history of all that mankind has ever recorded has provided even the slightest hint of the supernatural. Nothing has ever been observed. Nothing has ever been found. Nothing. Not a single shred of evidence whatsoever.
Besides, what's life without a bit of magic and a few Gods? It's like a cake with no frosting. ;)While I agree with the sentiment, the answer is fairly obvious: exactly what it appears to be.
As much as it saddens me, and as much as I wish it were otherwise, I do not believe that a truly intelligent person can continue to believe in gods and magic on sentiment alone, yet sentiment is all that such things have left to offer.
All of the evidence points at a harsh reality. A cake without frosting may in fact be undesirable, but nonetheless there is no frosting, nor is there likely ever to be any.
Still...I'd say the extraordinary claim is based on perspective...as far as someone who is religious is concerned the fact that one could possibly NOT believe in God is extraordinary.
There is a giant purple monster on Pluto that causes gravity every time he washes his hands. What? You say that is extraordinary? Well, you CAN'T disprove it so it must be true!
It's not a lack of curiousity...I perfectly understand the big bang theory and all of that, it seems like a logical way of explaining things based on the other information we can derive.
No offense, but I highly doubt you understand the big bang theory beyond the fact that there was some sort of bang that caused the universe to expand. I consider myself pretty well versed in science (as much as a college student could I suppose) and I barely understand the exact workings. It's one of those things best left to the triple Ph.D holding physicists.
I'm afraid my mind can't comprehend such things and so I usually stop after thinking for a bit and just accept that there are some things that I cannot know, things that were perhaps created by some higher power.
So just because you can't understand exactly how something works, you are willing to say that some unobservable force/person did it? That is being intellectually lazy my friend. It is certain that there are some topics of the universe that are impossible for us to understand or comprehend right now. That doesn't mean we will never understand it or that we should stop trying.
Besides, what's life without a bit of magic and a few Gods? It's like a cake with no frosting.
No, it makes the universe must more fantastic and wonderful in my eyes. It is boring to think that something created this universe with a plan, it is much more fantastic to understand how it happened and the insurmountable odds we have overcome to be here. And even if there was magic, it would be commonplace and just as ordinary as the sun rising or gravity. You would be thinking "Man, think about how awesome it would be if there was no magic! How would we get anything done?"
I'll give Burden of Proof a listen today. Still...I'd say the extraordinary claim is based on perspective...as far as someone who is religious is concerned the fact that one could possibly NOT believe in God is extraordinary. I'd say that is why religious debates are rather pointless in the first place, although this one has been rather fun since I decided to play devil's advocate.
Based on perspective? Well do blind people believe that colors exist?
@ Jason: I guess that depends on what part of the Devil's Advocate you think I lie about? I flatly stated that I don't reject the idea of God as a savior, primarily because that is an ingrained belief from the way I was raised and it just seems wrong to say I don't believe it. None the less I don't buy into the Bible or going to Church, etc...
Perhaps Devil's Advocate is the wrong phrase...perhaps it should just be for the sake of argument/debate.
I forget who wrote it but I'll clarify that I do not understand every detail of the Big Bang theory. I understand perfectly the concept as it has been explained to me in laymen's terms as would apply to the vast majority of people who would make such a statement. I am but a mere computer programmer and do not aspire to being a lawyer, doctor, or rocket scientist.
Based on various rebuttals that I have received during my time on the forums I must say that I appear to be on the cusp of not quite intelligent enough to debate/argue here. The story of my life. I take for granted a great number of basic assumptions and I rarely put a great deal of thought into the things I write...I just throw them out there and see what sticks.
It usually results in me looking rather like an idiot and having a great deal of difficulty convincing anyone otherwise. But that doesn't bother me obviously or I would've changed that habit long ago. I always find it more entertaining to just throw my thoughts out and see what happens. I'm more of a trial and error kind of guy...that's reflected in my programming...I find details boring most of the time.
I think Christians that believe in rapture shouldn't be allowed to drive cars, in case they randomly disappear one day. That's got to be at least 25% of drivers in America, should clear up the roads a little.
Comments
There are chapters in the God Delusion that you should read. I'm too lazy to dig out the book or find a quote somewhere, but let's just say that it entirely crushes you and move on with our lives, eh?
Even as a Christian, I have to say that I agree. But then again, according to most Christians, I'm not one of them.
Anyway, my two cents are as follows:
I have no problem believing that a greater being created all that I see around me, it keeps me from losing my mind wondering where everything came from. I do take exception to the Bible as the WORD of God in any format....it's just a strange story if you ask me.
"Burden of Proof." The negative wins by default in this case. ^_~
I can't fault you much for actively choosing to not think about the beginnings of the universe, but I must say that I could never stand to live with that lack of curiosity you appear to have.
Was there more than one big bang? It seems rather short sighted to think that the universe that we see can be so large but only limit it to what we can see. So perhaps there are other galaxies and such expanding towards us? It's absolutely insane, yet there is still the vastness of space...how can it go on forever...what was there before? Was it a giant unending whiteness instead of a giant unending blackness? I'm afraid my mind can't comprehend such things and so I usually stop after thinking for a bit and just accept that there are some things that I cannot know, things that were perhaps created by some higher power. (Of course than I have to wonder where the higher power came from, but I figure if I'm going to accept the higher power thing than I may as well accept his continued existence time immemorial.)
I'd say I don't accept the savior bit but that's rather ingrained from my upbringing and I'm not entirely sure anyway. I do find that for the most part organized religion is irrational and involves very little thought. So as I continue to experience things and wonder about things I apply what I know to what I believe and vice versa and if science wins out fantastic, that doesn't bother me in the least. If God wins out...well...that's fairly rare, and I don't know that I'd quantify him/it as God at this point in my life.
Besides, what's life without a bit of magic and a few Gods? It's like a cake with no frosting.
...You don't seem to realize that all of those questions are part and parcel to the theories of the origin of our universe, and that scientists do in fact consider them.
Questioning them is one thing. Putting forth an answer to the question is another. Accepting an answer for which there is zero evidence is sheer foolishness.
If science wins out fantasticScience has already won, in effect. Nothing in the history of all that mankind has ever recorded has provided even the slightest hint of the supernatural. Nothing has ever been observed. Nothing has ever been found. Nothing. Not a single shred of evidence whatsoever.
Besides, what's life without a bit of magic and a few Gods? It's like a cake with no frosting. ;)While I agree with the sentiment, the answer is fairly obvious: exactly what it appears to be.
As much as it saddens me, and as much as I wish it were otherwise, I do not believe that a truly intelligent person can continue to believe in gods and magic on sentiment alone, yet sentiment is all that such things have left to offer.
All of the evidence points at a harsh reality. A cake without frosting may in fact be undesirable, but nonetheless there is no frosting, nor is there likely ever to be any.
Perhaps Devil's Advocate is the wrong phrase...perhaps it should just be for the sake of argument/debate.
I forget who wrote it but I'll clarify that I do not understand every detail of the Big Bang theory. I understand perfectly the concept as it has been explained to me in laymen's terms as would apply to the vast majority of people who would make such a statement. I am but a mere computer programmer and do not aspire to being a lawyer, doctor, or rocket scientist.
Based on various rebuttals that I have received during my time on the forums I must say that I appear to be on the cusp of not quite intelligent enough to debate/argue here. The story of my life. I take for granted a great number of basic assumptions and I rarely put a great deal of thought into the things I write...I just throw them out there and see what sticks.
It usually results in me looking rather like an idiot and having a great deal of difficulty convincing anyone otherwise. But that doesn't bother me obviously or I would've changed that habit long ago. I always find it more entertaining to just throw my thoughts out and see what happens. I'm more of a trial and error kind of guy...that's reflected in my programming...I find details boring most of the time.