New pope

[Birdbrain]

Very well said. And I agree with you on that. And will just agree to disagree.

I'm also not sure there is any proof that God doesn't exist. So saying he doesn't exist is too an outlandish claim

[Dudecore]

Very well said. And I agree with you on that. And will just agree to disagree.

I'm also not sure there is any proof that God doesn't exist. So saying he doesn't exist is too an outlandish claim

I never claimed he didn't exist, I just said there is no evidence. I don't spend my time disproving werewolves, vampires, pink unicorns or anything else without evidence. Those are matters that do not concern me. Until evidence exists for god, then I'll worry about it.

[Birdbrain]

Very well said. And I agree with you on that. And will just agree to disagree.

I'm also not sure there is any proof that God doesn't exist. So saying he doesn't exist is too an outlandish claim

I never claimed he didn't exist, I just said there is no evidence. I don't spend my time disproving werewolves, vampires, pink unicorns or anything else without evidence. Those are matters that do not concern me. Until evidence exists for god, then I'll worry about it.

ok, Sorry for being an ass than. After all, assuming makes an ass out of u and me

And you have an interesting viewpoint on things, and its been fun looking at your perspective

[Jarrk]

Very well said. And I agree with you on that. And will just agree to disagree.

I'm also not sure there is any proof that God doesn't exist. So saying he doesn't exist is too an outlandish claim

Its not outlandish unless you prove he/she/it exists.

[Kareason]

Humanity's quest for knowledge must be built on our ability to identify "what are the things we don't understand?", and searching for those answers. We can do that by finding, analyzing and observing real life events and evidence. We shouldn't have the luxury that religious people do: invent the answers and claim they're unquestionably true. We would still be praying for the plague to stop if not for certain observable principles about the way disease is spread.

Disproving or casting doubt on one theory does nothing to establish the truth of another - EVEN IF you can prove to me that evolution does not exist, you're not one micron closer to convincing me that "god did it". Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. As I stated before; if you can prove something without evidence, I can disprove it without evidence.

If I started making outlandish claims about the origins of the universe and insist that my theory be taken seriously by scientists, they'll require me to support my assertions and offer physical and mathematical proof. Because to do otherwise would mean that every such claim be taken on the same merit. What about Intelligent Design/Creationism doesn't make those same unfounded claims? Until such proofs exist, we must keep searching, and we'll be more than happy to utter the three words that keep scientific progress (and all human progress) moving forward: "I don't know".

Russell's teapot is a great example of this. As someone who makes his living in the science field, and hold multiple degrees therein, I tend to agree with what you have said. Any claim that can not be tested, supported, and replicated is lacking foundation. I was raised Southern Baptist but can say from an early age I didn't feel comfortable due to the heavily and unyielding dogma that seemed to have no room for the grey areas that are part of all life.

I would also like to add that this is the 2nd time a serious religious discussion has broken out on these boards. Both times it has been handled with respect and dignity by all sides. I for one and proud to be part of this group, where we seem to truly respect each other's ideas/beliefs regardless of how they conflict with our own. This, to me, is what ultimately proves that humanity has a chance for a brighter future.

[Keyeto]

I'd like to weigh in here. First off, I agree about the community. I'm proud to be part of a community that can have these kinds of talks/debates and not get out if hand. You guys are great. Second, I have to agree with the statements about evidence. Without evidence, a lot of things are just claims with no weight, regardless of whether or not people believe in it, or how many people believe in it. Plenty of people believe vaccines caused autism, the world was flat, and smoking had no lasting health effects. Only through research and the solidifying of evidence can we truly be sure of things; that's the entire point of evidence. I really dislike having these kinds of debates and hearing the finalizing Christian argument being, "Well, you can't prove god DOESN'T exist". That's your argument? Your gratuitous amount of faith and lifestyle is based on that fact? This is not in reference to anyone here, simply something I've noticed and experienced.

I do have a question for some of you though. It is my understanding there are pastors in this conversation. I ask this: What is the danger in not believing in God?

This question seems a bit ignorant, so let me explain.

I was raised Catholic, and went to Catholic school in my younger years. I was basically told to believe in god or I would go to hell. My question is: Why? He is an omniscient being, yes? This means he knows everything about me. My choices and decisions, why I made them, how I was confronted with them in the first place, etc. I'm led to believe that he is an understanding god, who loves all of his children. How could a loving god, who completely understands why I can't believe in him, and all the reasons why I chose to not believe, send me to Hell, if I was a good person otherwise? If he truly understands, that would seem unjust, and certainly not the action of a loving god. I understand this question may seem harsh, as its always met with "Stop talking like that, it's not very Christian" or "That's not how we raised you". But I ask sincerely. It is a question I've had for a while.

[Double-O-Scotch]

Mind-boggling question keyeto, for which I have no answer, but would love to hear any responses.  I've asked the same question myself...

[NyghtHawk]

Keyeto,

It is true God knows everything and the choices you will make, but you have to realize He is just. He gives you the opportunity to believe in Him. If you decide not to, that is your choice. Not His. The consequence for not living for Him is clear but that is a choice you make. He doesn't force you to believe, you have free will to chose as you will. If you ask Jesus for forgiveness and to come into your life to guide you in all you do, He will.

I am not Catholic, I am simply a God fearing servant. I go to a Baptist church but denomination is not what is important. The Bible doesn't say good deeds get you to heaven or following religious dogma. Just follow Jesus. That is clear.

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." John 14:6

[Piotr]

To tackle this, you must accept that religion is just a tool, made by people for people. As silly as it sounds, try to separate religion from God. Then you realise that at certain points of history of mankind, the tool evolved and changed to better suit the times, if you will. But in any case, the tool is not able to fit all users. That is why you are asked to shut down parts of your brain to use the tool. There are many people who cannot comprehend stuff anyway, for them the religion is also a blessing.

Religion as a tool provides us with ultimate law and ultimate force to enforce this law. It helps tremendously with running societies. It also gives a lot of people hope and happiness.

Scientific evidence is this: for every bad deed of the Church, there are thousands upon thousands of good deeds. All in all, its a great and very helpful organisation, and so are most of religions.

[Dudecore]

Keyeto See: the problem of omniscience, the omnipotence paradox, the problem of evil, and determinism.

The concept of free will is slowly being diminished everyday. Soon we may have an understanding of our brains, so vast in fact, thaf we may wonder why we ever thought we had any control over it. Free will is an illusion, it is left over code in our chimp brains to cope with existence.

I am not going to continue that discussion, we had it some time ago and it was difficult to follow and portray on this message board.

[Bookmeister]

Wow is there a lot going on here. First I would like to say also how great this community is. There are no derogatory comments or condescending going on. I believe at this point there are two
equally deserving threads going in here. One about science and one about faith or belief.

I will talk about the science one first. I see no contradiction between science and faith as many scientists throughout history and indeed many today are faithfull Christians. But there are contradictions within secular science today. I believe all contradictions within Christianity are perceived contradictions and not real ones and I would be happy to discuss these.

Let me pose two to those of you who are atheists and cling to science to answer all. The base premise of science is that in order for something to be valid it must be observable and repeatable. That said what do you do with the Big Bang theory? Not observable nor repeatable. And how about the idea that something came from nothing. Never once has it been observed that something came from nothing let alone repeatadly.

[Kareason]

Nyght,

I see this a little differently. To me saying "You have the right to chose but it had best be my way" is not a just and loving action. It would be like me putting a gun to your head, demanding all your cards or I will kill you, then saying your refusal is suicide not murder. The one who acts is the one that bears the onus of the action. Just because the guidelines are in place does not make them fair or just. As a parent I can honestly not think of any decisions children could make that would make me want to punish them forever in the most painful way imaginable. Sure, I can see a ton of decisions that they can/will make that I will be completely against but my love for them would never let me punish them in such an extreme manner.

I was also raised Baptist so I can understand the position you are coming from. I just can't balance the scales when I look at the other side. It's the same for the whole "sins of the father" concept. I admire anyone that can hold their faith when they see the other side, I just wish more were like everyone here and realized that it is their faith and not for everyone.

[Birdbrain]

It's my understanding that hell is a separation from God. And if we choose to separate ourselves from him, then we send ourselves there. Not God 

[Keyeto]

This still seems a bit odd to me though. Say I live a good life. I don't murder, I don't steal, and am overall a good person. The only thing is, due to lack of solid proof, I am unable to blindly follow this omnipotent being (the word blindly is not meant to offend, I have no problem with those who do believe in God). That means I don't get into Heaven, and a rapist can simply because he accepted Jesus? That just doesn't seem like a very Just way of doing things. I thought one of the main points if the bible was to instill a moral code in people, that they might live a good, moral life, in addition to believing in god. But not believing completely outweighs the moral life aspect?

My reasoning is this:

Say I'm god. Two people are before me, waiting to get into heaven.

The first is a murderer who believed I exist.
The second lived a good life, and was the best person he could be. He did not believe in me, or my son. I understand why he didn't believe (omniscience), and it makes sense.

The first man gets into paradise over the second, simply for believing? Or am I misunderstanding?

Edit: Wow, there were several posts that happened while I was typing this up. This was intended for what NyghtHawk had said. But is still a question I have in general.

[Hays413]

The Big Bang is neither observable nor repeatable...? May I bring your attention to the LHC, CERN?