(June 11, 2016 at 6:19 am)Homeless Nutter Wrote:

(June 10, 2016 at 10:42 am)popsthebuilder Wrote: [...]If you can't accept that scriptures of the faithful expressly condone science then that's your own willful bias and ignorance.[...]

(June 10, 2016 at 10:12 am)Catholic_Lady Wrote: [...]A belief in God is not intrinsically against science. It only is that way if people choose to make it that way.

Nonsense. If there was a god - science would be impossible. If you allowed for existence of a personal, omnipotent, omnipresent being, able to break laws of physics at a whim and allegedly displaying human-like emotions and "will" - how could you EVER scientifically establish ANYTHING?

Is the speed of light the fastest speed possible in the universe? Of course not - omnipotent god can speed it up, slow it down, create photons mid-flight, or stop them at will. Can energy be destroyed? Sure - by god. So Einstein can go f*ck himself. Does Pi equal 3.14159265359...? Who knows - if god wills it to be so - then that's what it will seem. But if god wants it to be different at any moment - he can change it and none of us need to be even aware. Are any of our measurements accurate? Can we rely on them, when - say - building space-ships? Of course not. God can manipulate Earth's gravity, time, curvature of space or anything else at any time.

Even if we tested all the relevant constants during every experiment, ever - that would still be no guarantee, that god wasn't simply making our scientific equipment show incorrect data. Why would he do that? Who are you to question god's motivations and his plans?... You say - he's benevolent, well - even if that was true, he could be misinforming us for the greater good - or whatever. Either way - science would be pointless and largely useless, just like it is viewed in most theocratic countries.

That's why belief in a human-like, omnipotent god, who freely interacts with the universe is irrational. And if a god had to adhere to laws and physics and such - well then that would be no god at all, but at best - a "middle-man", some sort of a lesser deity, or a very advanced alien, since whoever, or whatever would be dictating the limitations of his power - that would be the real god. Also - miracles would be impossible.

So, yeah - every theistic religion is at its very core anti-scientific. It's a good thing, that they're all nonsense, which is why science works.

Why would GOD manipulate natural laws?

Also why does it have to be like a man, other than the fact that that is the easiest way for us to relate to IT.

You seem to be making associations that aren't there or needed, in order to back up your personal opinion.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

(June 11, 2016 at 7:48 am)popsthebuilder Wrote: That's odd. I accept all of those I some extent, yet also accept the bible to some extent. Whooda thunk it?!

Quote:Compartmentalization is an unconscious psychological defense mechanism used to avoid cognitive dissonance, or the mental discomfort and anxiety caused by a person's having conflicting values, cognitions, emotions, beliefs, etc. within themselves.

Compartmentalization allows these conflicting ideas to co-exist by inhibiting direct or explicit acknowledgement and interaction between separate compartmentalized self states.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compartmen...sychology)

(June 11, 2016 at 7:48 am)popsthebuilder Wrote:

(June 11, 2016 at 5:57 am)Constable Dorfl Wrote: Thought you had me on ignore Wooters? Well that's what you told me.

So, now I can add liar to your list of attributes.

@Pops, here is a non-exhaustive list of scientific disciplines you have to totally reject to accept the bible: Physics, chemistry, biology, geology, astronomy. The bible explicitly contradicts central tenets of all of these discplines. Therefore the bible by its own admission is incompatible with science.

That's odd. I accept all of those I some extent, yet also accept the bible to some extent. Whooda thunk it?!

[FACE WITH STUCK-OUT TONGUE AND WINKING EYE]

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

Well look at it this way, the bible says god created the world out of nothing somewhere between 6 and 10 thousand years ago. It makes no real account of the rest of the universe, not talking about other galaxies or planets and says that stars are simply fixed lights in the sky. Well all that is wrong. And it all contradicts astronomy (or cosmology to be properly correct) and physics at the most fundamental levels. With regards biology it claims that animals and plants were created separately on two days and have little to no relation to each other, and that man is not an animal but some sort of god manque. That is a total rejection of evolution (both theory and phenomenon) which, as we all know, is the cornerstone of modern biology, and one of the cornerstones of modern medicine (the germ theory being predicated on evolution being correct).

The list goes on, the bible speaks of a flat earth, describes a world wide flood (which given the world's reservoirs of water is impossible), talks about god controlling gravity and many other concepts which are flatly contradicted by science. So if you accept science you must reject the truth of the bible in respect of physical phenomena, and if you reject the bible's explanation for physical phenomena (essentially "goddidit") what is left for god to exist in?

(June 11, 2016 at 7:51 am)Redbeard The Pink Wrote:

(June 11, 2016 at 7:48 am)popsthebuilder Wrote: That's odd. I accept all of those I some extent, yet also accept the bible to some extent. Whooda thunk it?!

[FACE WITH STUCK-OUT TONGUE AND WINKING EYE]

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

OK, so you hold mutually contradictory beliefs. Bully for you. What are you trying to prove, exactly? That you're good at mental gymnastics?

They are not contradictory.

If you want to assume all of the bible is to be taken literally( a gross error), and that all scientific THEORY is absolutely, completely correct( we know it isn't as it isn't unified) then sure, think they contradict one another. Just don't consider yourself to be open minded at all or without bias. Consider your motives. Are they of hatred, fear, or pride at all?

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

(June 11, 2016 at 7:57 am)Homeless Nutter Wrote:

(June 11, 2016 at 7:48 am)popsthebuilder Wrote: That's odd. I accept all of those I some extent, yet also accept the bible to some extent. Whooda thunk it?!

Quote:Compartmentalization is an unconscious psychological defense mechanism used to avoid cognitive dissonance, or the mental discomfort and anxiety caused by a person's having conflicting values, cognitions, emotions, beliefs, etc. within themselves.

Compartmentalization allows these conflicting ideas to co-exist by inhibiting direct or explicit acknowledgement and interaction between separate compartmentalized self states.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compartmen...sychology)

In order for one to compartmentalize things they must divide them. I do neither, thanks.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

(June 11, 2016 at 7:52 am)popsthebuilder Wrote: Why would GOD manipulate natural laws?

To >poof< things into existence. To cause billions of years worth of geological changes with one flood. To resurrect the dead. To walk on water. Who are you to question god's motivations?

(June 11, 2016 at 7:52 am)popsthebuilder Wrote: Also why does it have to be like a man, other than the fact that that is the easiest way for us to relate to IT.

Says so in the bible. Twice. In a row...
Genesis 1:27
"So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them"

What parts of the bible are meant to be taken nonliterally, and how can you know that? By what metric?

(June 11, 2016 at 7:52 am)popsthebuilder Wrote: Why would GOD manipulate natural laws?

So that he could walk on water, heal the sick with no medicine, flood the globe without leaving any physical evidence...you know...god stuff.

Quote:Also why does it have to be like a man, other than the fact that that is the easiest way for us to relate to IT.

Virtually every fictional character created by humans is human in some regard.

Quote:You seem to be making associations that aren't there or needed, in order to back up your personal opinion.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

No, his assessment of human religion is much more honest than yours.


Why does god have to be able to break physical laws? Because religious people virtually always assert a god who can and does break physical laws.


Why does god have to have human qualities? Because virtually all of man's conceived gods are human-like characters.

(June 11, 2016 at 8:00 am)popsthebuilder Wrote: In order for one to compartmentalize things they must divide them. I do neither, thanks.

That's what you tell yourself - it's your subconscious way of dealing with the fact, that your different beliefs are inconsistent with one another. If you divided them - you might be able to look at them closely and understand them. And then you'd have to see how scientific facts are incompatible with your theology. But that would hurt, so you just throw it all together into one incoherent mess and pretend, that you understand the universe... Hey - whatever helps you sleep at night. lol

(June 11, 2016 at 8:07 am)Stimbo Wrote: What parts of the bible are meant to be taken nonliterally, and how can you know that? By what metric?

I think the bit about the cheese-makers was not meant to be taken literally, but refers to all manufacturers of dairy products...