Stephen Hawking
06 September 2010, 08:18 PM
#301
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This just goes to show that your beliefs are completely outdated, you think it is ok, in your mind, for people with a different sexual orientation to yourself, to be stoned to death.
It won't be long before the bible is updated to allow gay marriages, going on past history.
It won't be long before the bible is updated to allow gay marriages, going on past history.
it will run & run
06 September 2010, 08:32 PM
#305
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
06 September 2010, 08:46 PM
#306
Owner of SNet
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 11,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now on to my point, we're told that theres millions of different factors that caused us all to be here today and in fact we're actually very, very lucky that everything turned out the way it did (distance from the sun and all that b*llocks)
So it made me think, whats the chances of us being here because of all these small events, with the odds of it happening the way it did being like 1,000,000,000,000 -1 when I could just be one thing/man that decided/made it all
Personally I don't believe in God but it makes you think
So it made me think, whats the chances of us being here because of all these small events, with the odds of it happening the way it did being like 1,000,000,000,000 -1 when I could just be one thing/man that decided/made it all
Personally I don't believe in God but it makes you think
TX.
06 September 2010, 08:59 PM
#307
So given those chances, life is pretty common in the universe, since there are over 100 billion stars in our galaxy alone and currently its estimated there are over 170 billion galaxies in the known universe.
06 September 2010, 09:09 PM
#309
You are underestimating the importance of the Christian metaphysical message. Its monotheism was revolutionary; one God, one truth, with the individual mattering. It builds on Judaism but emphasises the individual not the tribe.
It's a change in human consciousness from say primitive animism then latter the Patheonism of antiquity. There is no universal truth with Panteonism and the world is governed by capricious Gods. It makes man more conscious if you like, less primitive and animal, enables abstract study and thought later science. There is not point in developing science if you believe the universe is disordered and unpredictable.
It's a change in human consciousness from say primitive animism then latter the Patheonism of antiquity. There is no universal truth with Panteonism and the world is governed by capricious Gods. It makes man more conscious if you like, less primitive and animal, enables abstract study and thought later science. There is not point in developing science if you believe the universe is disordered and unpredictable.
The Greeks had a society that produced high art, but the never developed the scientific method as we understand it today. Plato came close to a kind of monotheism, which is why Neitzche called Christianity 'Plato for the masses'.
If nothing else it's the way Christianity was successful in carrying this 'truth' to people and into history.
Plato was left forgotten and gathering dust or accessible to scholars (an elite) only.
No I really don't think the modern morality of compassion in the West comes from anywhere else but Christianity. The Romans had a morality of strength and the indigenous pagan religions were similar. Christ carries a message of being compassionate and this was built on by modern humanists.
06 September 2010, 09:18 PM
#310
Super Muppet
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Inside out
Posts: 33,364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm underestimating nothing at all. The notion that monotheism is or was somehow vital to the development of science is an oft-repeated favourite of philosophical historians, but I don't think it's in the slightest coincidental that pretty much without exception all of those who subscribe to the theory have strongly Christian leanings, and in many cases have actually studied at religious colleges or served in the Church. If you actually took the trouble to look, you'd find there are just as many equally well-argued theses that propose a precisely reversed relationship between the two, ie. that it was interest in the scientific workings of the world around them that led to the development of monotheistic religions by early populations, and not the other way around.
Could we really expect a man living more than 2 millenia ago to have understood the world as well as we do now, or did a couple of centuries ago? The Greeks did pretty well, given the circumstances.
So we're back now to claiming that the message of Christianity is the most important thing that any person can possibly know? And I thought we were actually getting somewhere in this discussion, oh well.
Are you actually proposing that anyone with any interest in the world around them had a straight choice between the teachings of Plato and Christianity, with no other avenue for intellectual development at all?
The concept of charity has in some form or other existed in virtually every developed society the world has ever known and amongst most of its significant religions past and present, and that includes the Romans. So far as humanists are concerned, you once again appear to be ignoring the fact that they consciously turned away from Christianity when they developed their own philosophy. That said, in seeming to acknowledge that they've at least had some role in improving the human condition, you're perhaps finally beginning to see that Christianity - to the extent it's been a force for progress at all - has taken us about as far as it could, but that its role in doing so slowly ground to a halt a good few centuries ago, when it was overtaken by more progressive schools of thought.
Could we really expect a man living more than 2 millenia ago to have understood the world as well as we do now, or did a couple of centuries ago? The Greeks did pretty well, given the circumstances.
So we're back now to claiming that the message of Christianity is the most important thing that any person can possibly know? And I thought we were actually getting somewhere in this discussion, oh well.
Are you actually proposing that anyone with any interest in the world around them had a straight choice between the teachings of Plato and Christianity, with no other avenue for intellectual development at all?
The concept of charity has in some form or other existed in virtually every developed society the world has ever known and amongst most of its significant religions past and present, and that includes the Romans. So far as humanists are concerned, you once again appear to be ignoring the fact that they consciously turned away from Christianity when they developed their own philosophy. That said, in seeming to acknowledge that they've at least had some role in improving the human condition, you're perhaps finally beginning to see that Christianity - to the extent it's been a force for progress at all - has taken us about as far as it could, but that its role in doing so slowly ground to a halt a good few centuries ago, when it was overtaken by more progressive schools of thought.
Are you a Christian ? if so why ?
06 September 2010, 09:18 PM
#311
Scooby Senior
but Christianity is the largest religion in the world today, why is that?
or I should really say that more people follow Jesus Christ than anyone else on earth.
or I should really say that more people follow Jesus Christ than anyone else on earth.
Last edited by salsa-king; 06 September 2010 at 09:20 PM.
06 September 2010, 09:34 PM
#314
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cas Vegas
Posts: 60,269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
06 September 2010, 09:37 PM
#315
Are you a Christian ? if so why ?
06 September 2010, 09:37 PM
#316
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sherwood Forest
Posts: 1,245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The vast majority are simply "Scared" Not to believe because Christianity has told them that non-believers will go to Hell etc.
All Religion is a form of control on the human population. This was the original police force. Why tell someone that if they do something wrong then they will suffer for all eternity if they don't want to control them? Scaremongering tactics and it has worked very well.
The perfect example of how Christianity controlled the people through fear was during the "Inquisition"
Last edited by Frosticles; 06 September 2010 at 09:39 PM.
06 September 2010, 09:40 PM
#317
Super Muppet
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Inside out
Posts: 33,364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by tony de wonderful
So we should hold science in contempt because the ***** used scientific methods to kills Jews?
We should all listen to Metallica - Nothing Else Matters and eat cheese lots of it
So we should hold science in contempt because the ***** used scientific methods to kills Jews?
We should all listen to Metallica - Nothing Else Matters and eat cheese lots of it
06 September 2010, 10:01 PM
#318
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm underestimating nothing at all. The notion that monotheism is or was somehow vital to the development of science is an oft-repeated favourite of philosophical historians, but I don't think it's in the slightest coincidental that pretty much without exception all of those who subscribe to the theory have strongly Christian leanings, and in many cases have actually studied at religious colleges or served in the Church. If you actually took the trouble to look, you'd find there are just as many equally well-argued theses that propose a precisely reversed relationship between the two, ie. that it was interest in the scientific workings of the world around them that led to the development of monotheistic religions by early populations, and not the other way around.
BTW how can you be interested in science and then use monothism to get there? Makes no sense...why not bypass monothisim?
If it is not a coincidence then what is it? Why did the eastern religions not develop science? Why monitheism? Christianity and to a very lesser extent Islam.
The concept of charity has in some form or other existed in virtually every developed society the world has ever known and amongst most of its significant religions past and present, and that includes the Romans. So far as humanists are concerned, you once again appear to be ignoring the fact that they consciously turned away from Christianity when they developed their own philosophy. That said, in seeming to acknowledge that they've at least had some role in improving the human condition, you're perhaps finally beginning to see that Christianity - to the extent it's been a force for progress at all - has taken us about as far as it could, but that its role in doing so slowly ground to a halt a good few centuries ago, when it was overtaken by more progressive schools of thought.
I'm not bothered about where Christianity is going, we are talking about it's contribution to western civilisation.
In some ways we are all Christian monotheists even if we are consciously say atheists. We see the world more like a Christian than an animist or other pagan.
06 September 2010, 10:37 PM
#321
Scooby Senior
Because of indoctrination and the stupidity of these people that are sucked in by all the mumbo jumbo.
The vast majority are simply "Scared" Not to believe because Christianity has told them that non-believers will go to Hell etc.
All Religion is a form of control on the human population. This was the original police force. Why tell someone that if they do something wrong then they will suffer for all eternity if they don't want to control them? Scaremongering tactics and it has worked very well.
The perfect example of how Christianity controlled the people through fear was during the "Inquisition"
The vast majority are simply "Scared" Not to believe because Christianity has told them that non-believers will go to Hell etc.
All Religion is a form of control on the human population. This was the original police force. Why tell someone that if they do something wrong then they will suffer for all eternity if they don't want to control them? Scaremongering tactics and it has worked very well.
The perfect example of how Christianity controlled the people through fear was during the "Inquisition"
So thats why places like Russia banned religion.. Christianity and the Bible?
06 September 2010, 10:53 PM
#322
Super Muppet
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Inside out
Posts: 33,364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
06 September 2010, 10:56 PM
#323
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reading the thread there does seem to me to be a difference between belief in some sort of creator or higher self/being/entity, and following a specific religion. I mean let's face ALL religions could be completely wrong in their understanding of god, and yet there still be a god.
One day science and religous theory could converge...who knows.
I do get annoyed at the few on here calling anyone who has beliefs 'deluded' that is a crass and arrogant response imo.
Were people who believed the world was spherical deluded when everyone else thought it was flat? Were those who believed the Universe was expanding rather than contracting deluded? There are thousands of examples of people believing in things 'without proof' that were later discovered to be true, were they all deluded?
One day science and religous theory could converge...who knows.
I do get annoyed at the few on here calling anyone who has beliefs 'deluded' that is a crass and arrogant response imo.
Were people who believed the world was spherical deluded when everyone else thought it was flat? Were those who believed the Universe was expanding rather than contracting deluded? There are thousands of examples of people believing in things 'without proof' that were later discovered to be true, were they all deluded?
06 September 2010, 11:16 PM
#325
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
06 September 2010, 11:20 PM
#326
Super Muppet
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Inside out
Posts: 33,364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reading the thread there does seem to me to be a difference between belief in some sort of creator or higher self/being/entity, and following a specific religion. I mean let's face ALL religions could be completely wrong in their understanding of god, and yet there still be a god.
One day science and religous theory could converge...who knows.
I do get annoyed at the few on here calling anyone who has beliefs 'deluded' that is a crass and arrogant response imo.
Were people who believed the world was spherical deluded when everyone else thought it was flat? Were those who believed the Universe was expanding rather than contracting deluded? There are thousands of examples of people believing in things 'without proof' that were later discovered to be true, were they all deluded?
One day science and religous theory could converge...who knows.
I do get annoyed at the few on here calling anyone who has beliefs 'deluded' that is a crass and arrogant response imo.
Were people who believed the world was spherical deluded when everyone else thought it was flat? Were those who believed the Universe was expanding rather than contracting deluded? There are thousands of examples of people believing in things 'without proof' that were later discovered to be true, were they all deluded?
06 September 2010, 11:26 PM
#327
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm saying that it's wrong to call people deluded for believing in something for which there is no proof
I'm saying science today can only explain a microscopic amount of what makes the Universe work. Maybe science cannot begin to explain the existence of god yet, but as our understand of the universe increases maybe one day it will, who knows?
I'm saying science today can only explain a microscopic amount of what makes the Universe work. Maybe science cannot begin to explain the existence of god yet, but as our understand of the universe increases maybe one day it will, who knows?
06 September 2010, 11:32 PM
#328
Owner of SNet
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 11,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMHO Jesus may well have existed albeit as a fraudster, say, doing stuff that Derren Brown does today. It's pretty easy to fool people who already "believe" as they look for stuff that fits with what they already believe & ignore stuff that doesn't.
TX.
06 September 2010, 11:37 PM
#329
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you just take the Bible though, a lot of it is already proven to be wrong yet people still "believe" which is kinda hard to fathom ...
IMHO Jesus may well have existed albeit as a fraudster, say, doing stuff that Derren Brown does today. It's pretty easy to fool people who already "believe" as they look for stuff that fits with what they already believe & ignore stuff that doesn't.
TX.
IMHO Jesus may well have existed albeit as a fraudster, say, doing stuff that Derren Brown does today. It's pretty easy to fool people who already "believe" as they look for stuff that fits with what they already believe & ignore stuff that doesn't.
TX.
My point all along has been about decoupling the whole 'god' debate from that of religious belief.
06 September 2010, 11:47 PM
#330
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Weston Super Mare, Somerset.
Posts: 14,102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does science believe that there are only 3 dimensions in the universe which just happen to be the ones humans understand or do thay guess/know there are others?
dl
dl