Religion's affect outside of religion

[Godscreated]

Many people know that religious people hardly question their religious beliefs, and their rationality is skewed when it comes to their faith.


I think fewer understand just how much it effects the rationality and logical thinking outside of the religion though, here's why a majority of believers cannot leave their faith out of their daily lives. Many people think that some people can leave their faith out of how they go about their daily life. Here is why i disagree:

We all know many people are taught religion as truth from a very young age so they develop a bias toward it. That's only one piece of the puzzle though. When you are taught religion as the truth from an early age, you also develop a distrust of science as well. Science says your wrong, you are probably more likely to believe you are right(unless you research it, which most people aren't interested in).

This distrust of science extends far beyond your religion. I mean, if you don't believe me, go watch an online conspiracy video, I can garuntee you the base of the argument starts with not trusting what scientists tell us is true. I was recently watching "Flat earth proof" videos(which were hilarious btw) and as I was thinking about it, it dawned on me that even though this has nothing to do with religion, it all came back to religion. 


This is why religion will almost certainly effect every believer even when they try to leave it out of their lives - [What I mean by this is the people who very casually say they "believe in god" with a very broad concept, who dont go to church or read scripture, who don't try to justify information with their religion]. These people will always come back to "well they are wrong about ___" and end up, even if mildly, not really accepting what scientists say outside of religon(basically anything) as fact, or having a harder time accepting things as fact.

 This may be true for some, but to lump us all into one bundle is unfair and plain wrong. I know several scientist who are devoted Christians, I myself like science and find much of it quite interesting. What I and these I mentioned do not believe in is evolution, one branch of many sciences. Evolution has no proofs none and so we disagree with it, isn't that pat of science questioning things until they become fact. You see I see you as a hypocrite, you accept things as fact that aren't, you need to look at yourself carefully before condemning others.

GC

[The Grand Nudger]

"Evolution" isn't a branch of science - it's an observation. The theory of evolution, the explanation for how this observed fact is accomplished.....is the unifying theory of biology.......you definitely have a problem with science, particularly in that you don't know what it is - and yet feel comfortable lying your ass off about how interesting you think it is. Fraid they can't both be true simultaneously. Bit like the unifying theory of biology, and your religion.

[Minimalist]

So... You believe religious people distrust 'science' because of faith in God? Here a thought, maybe people distrust 'science' because it is so often wrong! Maybe it hard to take- something as absolute truth when every couple of years that 'truth' changes.

That's right, drippy.  YOU cling to the stupid superstitions of antiquity.  Leave the heavy thinking to those of us who can handle it.

[TheRocketSurgeon]

I know several scientist who are devoted Christians, I myself like science and find much of it quite interesting. What I and these I mentioned do not believe in is evolution, one branch of many sciences. Evolution has no proofs none and so we disagree with it, isn't that pat of science questioning things until they become fact. You see I see you as a hypocrite, you accept things as fact that aren't, you need to look at yourself carefully before condemning others.

GC

This is a lie. My own fiancee is a Christian (Methodist), completely devout and one of the only Christians I know who knows the Bible as well as I do. Yet she is an evolutionary biologist, specifically one who works in the field of genetics.

You have been misled by the Discovery Institute about what scientists who are Christian really think about evolution. I don't say "misled" lightly; the Discovery Institute goes out of their way to misrepresent what scientists say, and has produced a "list" of scientists who reject evolution that in fact contains only one. When the guy who made the following video tracked down the scientists listed by the DI, on their list, the replies he gets back shows that no one in biology doubts evolution, and the CI was lying by placing them on the list.

[The Grand Nudger]

In all my years here, Rocket, I've only ever managed to bring -one- single creationist's head out of their asses, despite the unambiguous, inarguable, and completely public information regarding both Modern Synth and the fraud perpetrated by that organization for no reason other than political gain.  Don't get your hopes up. It's the reason I joined the boards, initially - after having been a lurker for a bit. I was naive enough to think that the things these people say actually inform their beliefs about -what- they say. They don't, they're just fucking with you. Even after conceding both the evidence and the fraud......said creationist still didn't "believe" in evolution. Probably still doesn't.

You can't reason someone out of something they didn't reason themselves into..and you can't dissuade someone of something -by- evidence that they didn't persuade themselves of -with- evidence.....in my experience.

[Regina]

I think religion has such strong effects on wider society because of the demand that everyone respects it. This doesn't so much apply to Christianity (outside America anyway) than it does Islam these days. It still affects everyone because we can't have a serious and candid discussion about these religions without being shot down as bigots for it.

You also have to understand that these are religions which hold political power, and with this comes an ability for the clergymen of these religions to influence policy that affects everyone. For example, the fact that euthanasia is still illegal in the majority of countries is because we have so many sadists out there who want to talk about some "sanctity of life". That "sanctity of life", naturally, has to extend to people of other faiths or no faith too. They have power to do that because we have to respect their religious beliefs.

[Drich]

Drich,

"Proof" is something that you can present to me that I CANNOT argue with.

:Roflol: Maybe if the universe revolved around you, and you got to set the standards of proof... However in the Real world we have a standard or definition for the word proof. Proof according to good old google is:
proof
/pro͞of/
noun
noun: proof; plural noun: proofs
1.evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement.

What you are describing is undeniable proof.

For me to believe in God, God need NOT provide you with undeniable proof. Because again the axis of the cosmos does not center around you, and what you have experienced/believe. All God needed to do is provide me with undeniable proof, for me He has done that.

I might even personally be prepared to believe that you sincerely had a personal experience,
but that STILL does not automatically translate into accepting your claim of an experience,
into my own proof of God's existence.

Even if I want to believe your claim,
if I am to be conscientious and honest with myself,
I am compelled to remain skeptical,
until I am personally provided with INCONTROVERTIBLE PROOF, myself.

Fail. your presumption is that my experiences are only unique to me. Thus requiring your 'belief' in order to validate. when in fact God offers the Same proof for you or anyone else who can Humble Himself before God to experience on their own. Proof of God is not found in a philosophical or scientific argument. Proof of God are a set of instructions (A treasure Map) that tells you how to Find Him. If you want validation of any map, one need only follow it.

Using your mother as an example is redundant,
because, if called upon,
you COULD actually provide proof to others
of your mother's existence,
whereas you cannot, with regard to God's existence.

Again, only if you ASSume that 'proof' was mine to give. When in fact God provides 'proof' for all those who A/S/K for it.

And I'm sorry, Drich...but I have to honestly say that I find it a bit tedious
that I had to explain that very obvious difference to you.

What is tedious is deconstructing the atheist 'proof' argument for like the thousandth time. To explain something as elementary as the true definition of 'proof' to someone who fancies himself a 'thinker.' Verses the 'thinkers' goal post relocation version of proof. It's like you guys were all programed to think one certain way about God. Rarly if ever does one of you have an original thought. You all speak to stereotypes and reference/plagiarize arguments constructed by men who at best have an elementary sunday school understanding of Christianity.

Yet, here I am and have been explaining how your perceptions of God, Christianity and proof fail without complaint. (until prompted.)
Did you really think, you are the first person to raise these concerns on this website? or, better yet did you really think I would not be able to answer your challenge?

Secondly,

You go on to claim that God HAS already given man proof of Himself.

Where is that?

I have seen no such thing.

Maybe because God does not answer to you. Or maybe because you are not the bright and shinny center of the universe you think yourself to obviously be. This means all of creation does not have to check in with you, and things can and do exist without your knoweledge

God did give man 'proof' in the Holy Spirit that was pour out in Acts 2.

what better proof of God is there than God fusing with you in your life? You don't have 'proof' because God does not want to give you any the way you are now. Despite what you may thing God is not in the business of providing undeniable proof. We have been given this life apart from God's known glory (undeniable proof) to show ourselves where our heart lie in relation to God. So at our final judgement we will know that whatever Christ judges for us will be just.

Thirdly,

How do you know that your experience of God is legitimate?

how do you know that you are not delusional,
seeing things no one else sees,

or, let's assume you are perfectly sane,
and that your experience was genuine
....you actually, legitimately experienced interaction with a supernatural being.

How do you know that the entity you observed
was actually who He claimed to be?

I can think of many, many reasons why a demon
might want to masquerade as God and fool humans into worshiping him,
...assuming there IS in fact a spirit realm, and such things as demons exist...

and by what yardstick to you gauge the authenticity of the manifestations and claims of spirits?

This is indeed a legitimate concern. Two whole other religions were started because of 'an angel speaking to a prophet.'

The answer to your senerio is simple. I look to serve the God of the bible. If said experience is not in line with scripture then the experience can easily be identified as not coming from God. Meaning if I'm told to do something or to believe differently.. then that message is not from God of the bible. Which is why we all must know what the bible actually says.

(And remember, as a Theist,
there is far more reason for YOU to be suspicious that you are being conned by a demon,
than there is reason for ME to think so,
since I'm not inclined to believe in demons, at all).

Finally Drich, to dismiss science because of conflicting theories or findings is so absurd that it angers me.

The cache of human knowledge reaped from Science is one where we have STEADILY MADE GAINS,
despite many backslides along the way.

lol
You did not actually read my first post to you did you?
I pointed out, that one who truly knows scripture (what it says and what it does not say) Does not fear 'science.' Those who can reconcile 'science with belief often see science' as man's attempt to explain the natural processes God has put into place.

The claims of Religion have STEADILY LOST GROUND over thousands of years.

Ah, no. the only thing loosing ground is the idea that God has to be magic, or God must keep Himself in line with the dark ages understanding of him. This is the only thing 'science' as done.. To completely dispel the dark ages understanding of God.

There is nothing 'science' can offer that religion can not assimilate, without compromising the intergrity of scripture.

I know it's hard for you not to argue the atheist Christian standard (Atheist smart! because Atheist believe in science, and Christian dumb because Christian believe in magic) but do try and put a little more effort into what you say. do try and meet the topical standard Ive set if for no other reason that not looking foolish infront of your peers by arguing against straw men.

Religion only continues to thrive and grow in numbers
because the majority of humanity chooses solace over facing hard truths,
is intellectually lazy, or ignorant,
or simply wants to win wars and wield power over those who do not agree with them.

Oh, the Irony...

It's truly funny that you can not see past your own set of sterotypes and ignorance toward all things 'religious,' yet you are so quick to identify this trait in a dying system of belief. Well done sir.. Well done. I think Dry Sand has to step down from the role of flag ship Atheist on this site.. Because you obviously fly that flag just a little bit higher than he does.

[MTL]

Drich,

you said:
**********************************************************************************
"Proof according to good old google is:
1.evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement. "

"What you are describing is undeniable proof. "
**********************************************************************************
Ok Drich, I am sorry if this was unclear.

I am basically referring to Evidence, versus Proof.

To say "Undeniable Proof" is repeating yourself, a redundancy.
Like saying "Car Automobile"

If what is being presented is undeniable.....then it is "Proof".

If it is not undeniable....it is merely "Evidence". 

If you want me to believe in God, I will need Proof.  Not merely what you submit as Evidence.

If it makes you feel better, fine, call it undeniable proof,
or as I did, myself:  Incontrovertible Proof.

yes, that is what I'm asking for,
and I only ask for it because Theists ask Atheists to believe.

which brings me to my next point...


you said:
**********************************************************************************
"For me to believe in God, God need NOT provide you with undeniable proof. "
**********************************************************************************
Drich,

I was indicating that if Theists, in general, want Atheists to believe in God,
then the onus is upon Theists to provide Atheists with proof of God.

If you want to believe in God, yourself,
and you are not asking others to believe, as well,

...then no, of course I don't require that you provide me with proof
....or even evidence, for that matter.

Believe what you like.  I don't care.

I would think I made this distinction fairly clear when I acknowledged that
YOU may very well have had a personal experience of God,
and that I am prepared to allow for its legitimacy.


I am simply saying that your claims of a personal experience
are not sufficient proof to bring about my own belief in god.

And I think you knew that. 

You're the Theist who came to post in an Atheist forum, don't forget.

You accuse me of being self-centred and thinking the world revolves around me,
but you are the one who automatically assumes that I am asking you to justify your own beliefs to me,
and I am doing nothing of the sort.

I am saying that if a Theist wants an Atheist to believe,
then the Theist must provide the Atheist  with proof.

If you want to believe on your own and leave others alone,
then I don't care what you believe....or why you believe it.

You're the one making it all about you.


You said,

**********************************************************************************
" your presumption is that my experiences are only unique to me.  "

**********************************************************************************

Drich,

I didn't presume any such thing.  At all.

I don't care if 99.999% of the planet believes exactly what you believe,
and had the same experience you had.

Until I have proof, I don't accept your beliefs
as reason to believe, for myself.

But, once again, as long as Theists don't harass me to believe, too
or use THEIR beliefs to justify limiting MY OWN rights and freedoms,
then I don't give a rat's ass what you believe.

I've said the same thing to Muslims.

I've said that even if 100% of the Earth's population was to convert to Islam, including myself,
that, in and of itself,
still would not prove that Allah exists or that the Qu'ran is the only "right" religion.

Now, as to the rest of your post,
I have a lot to reply, with,
but I must do it a little later.

I will return.

[Godscreated]

I know several scientist who are devoted Christians, I myself like science and find much of it quite interesting. What I and these I mentioned do not believe in is evolution, one branch of many sciences. Evolution has no proofs none and so we disagree with it, isn't that pat of science questioning things until they become fact. You see I see you as a hypocrite, you accept things as fact that aren't, you need to look at yourself carefully before condemning others.

GC

This is a lie. My own fiancee is a Christian (Methodist), completely devout and one of the only Christians I know who knows the Bible as well as I do. Yet she is an evolutionary biologist, specifically one who works in the field of genetics.

You have been misled by the Discovery Institute about what scientists who are Christian really think about evolution. I don't say "misled" lightly; the Discovery Institute goes out of their way to misrepresent what scientists say, and has produced a "list" of scientists who reject evolution that in fact contains only one. When the guy who made the following video tracked down the scientists listed by the DI, on their list, the replies he gets back shows that no one in biology doubts evolution, and the CI was lying by placing them on the list.

---

 

---

 I see you're still bragging about yourself, and as far as that list I did not mention any on it, I said plainly these were people I knew.

GC

[TheRocketSurgeon]

This is a lie. My own fiancee is a Christian (Methodist), completely devout and one of the only Christians I know who knows the Bible as well as I do. Yet she is an evolutionary biologist, specifically one who works in the field of genetics.

You have been misled by the Discovery Institute about what scientists who are Christian really think about evolution. I don't say "misled" lightly; the Discovery Institute goes out of their way to misrepresent what scientists say, and has produced a "list" of scientists who reject evolution that in fact contains only one. When the guy who made the following video tracked down the scientists listed by the DI, on their list, the replies he gets back shows that no one in biology doubts evolution, and the CI was lying by placing them on the list.

---

 

---

 I see you're still bragging about yourself, and as far as that list I did not mention any on it, I said plainly these were people I knew.

GC

How is "I am a former evolutionary biologist and my fiancee, who is a devout Christian, still is one" bragging about myself?

You're going to sit here and try to tell me that you know  working, publishing biologists who are Creationists?