Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
And faith is actually a dishonest stance to take. First you lie to yourself, and the lie has a tendency to spread depending on how merry or urgent the message is. It changes one's mindset to dismiss anything that doesn't conform to what they take on faith, even if the new information presented is based on reality.
The oxygen/CO2 information is also a fatal blow to the creationist "God made the planet just right for us to live on" argument. Of course, why bother them with facts?
Christian apologetics is the art of rolling a dog turd in sugar and selling it as a donut.
(October 2, 2013 at 5:24 pm)Doubting Thomas Wrote: I think there's a quote from none other than Martin Luther, who said something like "Reason is the greatest enemy to faith."
So an unwitting admission on his part that he knew he was full of shit.
October 2, 2013 at 6:00 pm (This post was last modified: October 2, 2013 at 6:01 pm by Brian37.)
(October 2, 2013 at 5:38 pm)Doubting Thomas Wrote: Anyone claiming that reason or logic are bad is not anyone I want to follow.
So you are not going to take it on faith that ABBA is the best band ever? BLASPHEMER!
Love your sig btw, but that can apply to all god claims and all naked assertions.
October 2, 2013 at 6:28 pm (This post was last modified: October 2, 2013 at 6:28 pm by ManMachine.)
(October 2, 2013 at 9:25 am)Tortino Wrote:
I think one of the biggest myths is that religion / Theism is at odds with science. That is, the more we discover, the more it "buries" God.
This post typically looks at how "naïve" ancient religious were and that they did not have an understanding of the world, and the more we discover the world, it highlights how ignorant people were back then.
Science and religion answer DIFFERENT questions and attempt to gain different knowledge about the world.
Let me use an analogy.
Suppose we are in the late 17th century (the year the first motor vehicle) was built.
Lets suppose you are walking down a country track by yourself and you see this motor vehicle parked and their is no one around it. Lets also assume, you don't know what you are seeing, you never knew anything about a motor vehicle, you don't know its purpose. Basically, you see a chunk of metal in front of you.
You go up to it and look with amazement, you kick the wheel softly and you go inside and you think "what is this"?. Then slowly, slowly you turn the steering wheel and you realise the wheel turns etc etc. You turn on the engine etc etc and you begin to realise that this is a transporter. It transports you from location to location. It has a purpose. You are happy, ecstatic. You look around you and their is no one around The designer is not around, no one. No one knew anything about it. Days go past and you realise this is the best thing. You are happy. It is taking you from place to place. What a difference it has made to your life. Logically, it is reasonable to expect that this thing Is designed with the intent of transporting you. All at the same time, you are IGNORANT of the mechanics of how the thing works, ie, mechanics, combustion etc etc. You have no idea how it works. However, everyday, you are praising everyday in your mind the creator of this great machinery. "What a great designer, how smart is he etc etc". This person in my example is like the Theist. Based on what he sees, he is reasonable to conclude that this piece of machinery is designed, even though he has never seen the designer, never had any "a priori' knowledge of cars etc etc.
Now, as time goes along, other people see this car and they investigate it, observe it, test it and find out how it works. In my example, this is like scientists. They are working out how things work, gaining knowledge etc etc.
Now, aren't BOTH parties correct and rational? The person who found the car, even though he was ignorant on how it worked, he just praised the designer he never saw and basically said "someone did this".....and the mechanics who figured out how it works? Aren't BOTH views correct?
Science is the study of the natural world, how things work, ie, thunder, lightning, weather, oceans etc etc etc. Theology is the study of the designer ete etc.
I don't see the conflict. They both attempt to answer different questions and attempt to gain different knowledge.
Science (if we are to be so loose with the term) and religion are both social constructs and therefore both will be shaped by the needs of the people who construct them.
Religion offers hope through censorship, if you follow the rules (scriptures, dogma, etc.) you will have a better future (salvation, enlightenment, succor in times of crisis, understanding, etc.)
Science offers hope through censorship, if you adhere to the rules (scientific method, peer review, etc.) you will have a better future (longer life-span, better health, warmth, comfort, understanding, etc.)
It is no coincidence that these two constructs offer the same remedies to the human condition. They are both anthropocentric systems, specifically constructed to meet human needs.
It is not science or religion that are 'at odds' as you say, but the people who claim to represent them... because they are human.
And for however long we have left to wander this lonely rock, it will always be (in the words of David Byrne) the same as it ever was.
MM
"The greatest deception men suffer is from their own opinions" - Leonardo da Vinci
"I think I use the term “radical” rather loosely, just for emphasis. If you describe yourself as “atheist,” some people will say, “Don’t you mean ‘agnostic’?” I have to reply that I really do mean atheist, I really do not believe that there is a god; in fact, I am convinced that there is not a god (a subtle difference). I see not a shred of evidence to suggest that there is one ... etc., etc. It’s easier to say that I am a radical atheist, just to signal that I really mean it, have thought about it a great deal, and that it’s an opinion I hold seriously." - Douglas Adams (and I echo the sentiment)
Quote:There definitely is conflict you would have to be blind to not see it.
Lets continue to use your analogy, now imagine the man who found the car insisted the steering wheel was made in a certain way in a certain factory and anyone who said he was wrong was going to be punished in excruciating pain forever.
I am not sure how this is relevant to my argument.
The people investigating the car actually find out the man was wrong and it wasn't made in the way he thought or in the place he thought, but the first man who found the car still insists the investigators are wrong.
This becomes a different question. Not a question of was it designed? As you notice in my analogy, he has never seen a car before, never had any concept on one...So how can he think it would be different if he never had any concept on one?
I'm not even sure what you're argument is, if you're argument is that living cells are like perfectly working cars then no they aren't because cells fuck up all the time, people die people get cancer, some people are born in excruciating pain and die in excruciating pain.
If you're argument is that we should believe in god because stuff is complicated then no that isn't good enough either.
All the things I mentioned in my argument were just to point out that actually religious people don't usually just believe stuff is complicated so there is a god, they believe in a specific type of god and that he wrote a specific book with specific rules and at points in history these things have definitely conflicted with science.
Are you ready for the fire? We are firemen. WE ARE FIREMEN! The heat doesn’t bother us. We live in the heat. We train in the heat. It tells us that we’re ready, we’re at home, we’re where we’re supposed to be. Flames don’t intimidate us. What do we do? We control the flame. We control them. We move the flames where we want to. And then we extinguish them.
![[Image: 10314461_875206779161622_3907189760171701548_n.jpg]](https://scontent-a-dfw.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfp1/t1.0-9/10314461_875206779161622_3907189760171701548_n.jpg)
