Science and religion

[jstrodel]

I call a liar anyone who lies. If you tell lies, you are a liar.


As for hell, the Bible gives different judgements, "shame and everlasting contempt", "a place of outer darkness", "their worm will not die and their fire is not quenched", "the lake of fire", "let the wicked continue to be wicked, let the vile continue to be vile", "do not be decieved, God is not mocked, whatever a man sows that he will also reap", "his eyes are over each of the sons of men, to give each according to his actions and as his deeds deserve".

The question of whether hell actually has fire or not is complicated and I don't know. What i do know is that punishment is related to the level of sin, Jesus acknowledged this and revelation supports it.

God is fair, but people that deliberately lead others into atheism, especially under false reasoning and deception will reap what they sow.

---

One person here says that "appeal to authority is fallacious", but that is just wrong. He repeats the claim and does not bother to look it up, despite the fact that appeal to authority is not always fallacious.

That is because he is a liar. He doesn't care whether he is wrong or the consequences it will have on others. He just wants to win. A man reaps what he sows.

[Joel]

I still expect you to answer my question(s).

[jstrodel]

Sure, which ones?

The post above is a a picture of what is going on in naturalistic approaches to science everywhere in the most prestigious journals of science. The person digs their head in the sand, won't admit they are wrong, and stakes out a claim against God, and doesn't care if they are wrong, and they still don't care if they are wrong.

[Joel]

The one directly before your last one.

[Tonus]

I do get upset a little when people think theists are crazy.

I don't think all theists are crazy. I grew up a Christian and most of my family, friends, and co-workers still are. I think people who demonstrate that they are crazy are probably crazy, though. It's not the theism part that makes me think a person is crazy, it's the part where that person sounds like a lunatic.

[jstrodel]

What are you saying?

That makes no sense, how is that 'turning the other cheek' by sentencing people to hell?

Also, I don't reject God. I just don't see why I should believe the Judeo-christian God, as oppose to Allah, Ganesh, Shiva, Thor, Zeus, or Horus.
They all have equal evidence for them. They all have people that say

I have seen God, I know God is real, I have seen miracles

God turns the other cheek by letting people insult God and sin, and God lets them do it forever, separated from God's blessings.

As for the religions, if Thor or Zeus were the ultimate God, why wouldn't they be reflected in the modern world. If God did miracles, wouldn't God continue to do miracles

1. If a concept of God was present in all or almost all nations and all people groups and has not died out, it is possible that that concept of God could be the creator God
2. The God of Christianity is present in almost every nation on earth and has not died out
3. The God who created everything could be the God of Christianity (MP 1,2)

As for Islam, Islam is so similar to Christianity it could act as evidence for the existence of the Christian God. The dominant world religions are the religions centered around the Biblical patriarch Abraham.

So, why should I believe you?

Because you only have so many years to figure out what life is about and you should take every chance you can to get to the right way. I have not told a lie in 6 or 7 years. I am extremely careful about lying. Why would I lie to you?

[Darkstar]

Oooh, argument ad populum!

Legitimate authority. They can use science to demonstrate their claims. As for god...

You are blind, blind, blind, blind, so blind, so so blind. Evolutionary theory may be true, but you are still blind, blind, blind, blind. Open your eyes! Look at what you are doing!

Don't you realize that you are presupposing what you are trying to prove?

I am? I thought that was you.

You presuppose that science is the way to validate claims, so science can prove that Christianity is true.

Well, science has been pretty good at validating claims so far. Religion...not so much.

But Christianity has its own authorities and structures of proof. You start off with the assumption that these are valueless, and you ignore them and push them to the side.

Yeah...I do. Because every time religion uses its standards of proof to try and find something, when science applies itself to the same problem, it turns out that religion had it all wrong. Zeus and Thor cause lightning? Poseidon causes tidal waves? Religion has time and time again demonstrated that it is useless at trying to figure out the physical world. Science has demonstrated even more often that it is an excellent tool for such.

(This is where you claim god is non-physical)
But even if god can't be directly observed, shouldn't we at least be able to verify the effects of his actions? That one million dollar prize is just sitting there...if there were so many miracles, wouldn't somebody have taken it already? They could even just give it to charity for crying out loud...

1. Science can verify evolutionary theory, but theology cannot be verified because theological methods do not yield knowledge.

Yep. Well,not quite. Theology (if true) can be verified, but not using methods that are demonstrably fallacious.

You don't argue this, you assume it, because you are blind, blind, blind, blind, blind, blind, so blind. Darkstar, I like you and think you are a nice person. But OPEN YOUR EYES. Do you realize what you are presuposing.

You don't know anything about theological methods. You don't know the evidential status of Duns Scotus or Thomas Aquinas or William of Occam because you have never read them. You don't care. You don't care about all of the different movements in theology, so you don't accept their authority.

That million dollars is collecting an awful lot of dust...

Give me evidence for 1. So many people have mountains of evidence that 1 is false. I have it. I want to cry to badly I feel so angry when I read the ignorance and lies that prevent people from realizing God's nature and how knowable he is, and seeing all the university politics color peoples understanding of theology. God is knowable. There are good arguments for God's existence, but more than that, if you seek God, you will find God.

Well, if it weren't for science, we would still be in the dark ages. If it weren't for religion, we would never have had them in the first place. Give me one important discovery made using theological methods.

Oh, and, again, other atheists here were theists and sought god for decades before finally giving up. Why would god hide himself from people?

I have been in 4 or 5 churches where they regularly see miracles. There is a whole Christian community that has its own authority that is not related to the science world, but why should science be the sole authority in the world?

What about philosophy?

If you want an example of where science was the only authority, look at Communist countries. Science is not everything.

Um, no, that would be the government that was the only authority. The state isn't run by people trying to force science on you. Now, if we want to start talking about middle eastern theocracies...

[Joel]

What are you saying?

That makes no sense, how is that 'turning the other cheek' by sentencing people to hell?

Also, I don't reject God. I just don't see why I should believe the Judeo-christian God, as oppose to Allah, Ganesh, Shiva, Thor, Zeus, or Horus.
They all have equal evidence for them. They all have people that say

God turns the other cheek by letting people insult God and sin, and God lets them do it forever, separated from God's blessings.

So, why should I believe you?

Because you only have so many years to figure out what life is about and you should take every chance you can to get to the right way.

But it's not 'turning the other cheek' when he subjects them to eternal suffering because of this.

And, I don't think you understand.
When you make the same claims as other religious believers, why is your word more important and truthful than theirs?

[jstrodel]

Is their concept of God probable? Did you see the above argument. There are many others you could make. Is it probable that Zues would reveal himself in ancient Greece and then be dormant for the rest of history?

[Darkstar]

Is their concept of God probable? Did you see the above argument. There are many others you could make. Is it probable that Zues would reveal himself in ancient Greece and then be dormant for the rest of history?

No, it isn't probable. Which is the same thing I say about your god. What if people insisted that they had seen miracles of a god other than yours, though? Would they be telling the truth? What do you consider to be a miracle anyway?