Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 332 Guests and 0 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters (30 Days)
Page 31 of 35 < 1 2 ... 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 >
Topic Options
#20874 - 04/25/07 08:25 AM Re: Evidence for God [Re: samwik]
terrytnewzealand Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/02/06
Posts: 1031
Loc: Whangarei New Zealand
Rose wrote:

"It is those who disagree with us who make us think. ...it is disagreement that makes us grow, challenges our thinking and expands our brains."

Right on Rose.

Top
.
#20875 - 04/25/07 08:30 AM Re: Evidence for God [Re: terrytnewzealand]
samwik Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/10/06
Posts: 1164
Loc: Colorado
red,
You are also very correct in saying that science doesn't get influenced by religion. (maybe w/ some exceptions)
...and science is replacing religion for many; there is competition. I wish more people would realize it can be both, and not just see it as either/or.

But science is materialistic (and I'm not talking economic materialism), only concerned with material, physical world.

The same argument applies to metaphysics.
I always laugh when someone says that controlled tests were done and showed no evidence of supernatural, metaphysical, or psychic effects.

Why should it, these things are not (if they exist) controlled by the material world; how can you run a controlled experiment on it. How can you speak of scientific evidence for something not of science.

So, I wandered a bit....

~SA
_________________________
Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.

Top
#20876 - 04/25/07 08:30 AM Re: Evidence for God [Re: samwik]
redewenur Offline
Megastar

Registered: 02/14/07
Posts: 1840
Originally Posted By: samwik
How can you speak of scientific evidence for something not of science.

Quite - but hey, you didn't answer my question grin
_________________________
"Time is what prevents everything from happening at once" - John Wheeler

Top
#20877 - 04/25/07 08:31 AM Re: Evidence for God [Re: samwik]
terrytnewzealand Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/02/06
Posts: 1031
Loc: Whangarei New Zealand
Samwik. You disagreed with the statement, "Religious belief needs to be rational." I'm afraid I disagree with you. It needs to be rational at least to some extent. As Rede said religion has had to "acknowledge that the Earth is spheroid, not flat" Once it acknowledges humans have evolved from ape-like creatures it will gain more credibility. But, as Dawkins says, this has implications most religions are not prepared to face. I've got to go for a while now but I'll come back with the quote.

Top
#20878 - 04/25/07 08:33 AM Re: Evidence for God [Re: samwik]
samwik Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/10/06
Posts: 1164
Loc: Colorado
ooops sorry for the double post.

redewenur,

What about the 95% of your post that I agreed with?

My comment kinda addresses that other 5% also. They are different spheres: one rational by definition; and the other transcendent (irrational?) by definition.

~~SA?
_________________________
Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.

Top
#20879 - 04/25/07 08:40 AM Re: Evidence for God [Re: samwik]
redewenur Offline
Megastar

Registered: 02/14/07
Posts: 1840
samwik: "What about the 95% of your post that I agreed with?"

Well, I'm gratified that we agree 95%. Now, come on, what about that other 5%? smile

Consider what Terry just said.

_________________________
"Time is what prevents everything from happening at once" - John Wheeler

Top
#20880 - 04/25/07 08:40 AM Re: Evidence for God [Re: samwik]
samwik Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/10/06
Posts: 1164
Loc: Colorado
Terry,
Yes, religions have to be rational to the extent that they must function in the material world; but only to that extent. Some go to great lengths to renounce materialism and transcend.

...and this goes back to evolving religions. They must adjust as the material world changes (due to science). Boy, I'd be pissed to; I hate change (hey, who moved my cheese).

Even purple rhinos can be shown to be somewhat rational, can't they?

~~SA

P.S. I see we're posting over each other. Apologies for the misunderstandings (unread posts, responses out of order, etc.)
~S
_________________________
Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.

Top
#20881 - 04/25/07 09:09 AM Re: Evidence for God [Re: samwik]
redewenur Offline
Megastar

Registered: 02/14/07
Posts: 1840
samwik, Re your reply to Terry:
Originally Posted By: samwik
religions have to be rational to the extent that they must function in the material world; but only to that extent...They must adjust as the material world changes (due to science).

It's important to remember that the material world doesn't actually change, no matter who says what about it. The changes are those in our knowledge and understanding, which in turn lead to changes in society, culture and so on. We need, more than ever before - owing to the accelerating pace of discovery - to be ready to modify our views and accommodate new knowledge. It amounts to more than just the ability to function in the material world. Conflicts arise from ignorance of objective reality; people suffer grievously through such ignorance. Science, through its objectivity, has the potential to unify humanity. Ignorance has the potential to destroy it.

Faith, belief in God, has no need of ignorance.
_________________________
"Time is what prevents everything from happening at once" - John Wheeler

Top
#20885 - 04/25/07 09:50 AM Re: Evidence for God [Re: redewenur]
samwik Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/10/06
Posts: 1164
Loc: Colorado
Yep, gotta agree. Whenever subjective realities meet, there is conflict. Subjective realities are like snowflakes....

I think most people operate with both modes, viewing some things objectively and others subjectively. ooo..profound, huh?

Anyway, my point is to embrace the duality. Don't deny others their subjective reality, and that'll make it easier for them to accept objective reality as it slaps them in the face with ever increasing frequency.

It's kinda like "doublethink," from Orwell's 1984.
Generally not seen as a good thing, but in this case...?

~SA
_________________________
Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.

Top
#20888 - 04/25/07 10:16 AM Re: Evidence for God [Re: samwik]
terrytnewzealand Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/02/06
Posts: 1031
Loc: Whangarei New Zealand
Redewenur wrote:

"The changes are those in our knowledge and understanding, which in turn lead to changes in society, culture and so on."

Agree totally, not just 95%.

Samwik. I think you would enjoy "The God Delusion". Bit more to it than just evolution of belief. The following quote is regarding absolute moral belief, esp euthanasia and abortion. He considers what would happen if, say, Australopithecus was still around. "But evolutionary continuity shows that there is no absolute distinction. Absolutist moral discrimination is devastatingly undermined by the fact of evolution. An uneasy awareness of this fact might, indeed, underlie one of the main motives creationists have for opposing evolution: they fear what they believe to be its moral consequences".

Ah. I've got that off my chest.

Top
#20966 - 04/26/07 10:39 PM Re: Evidence for God [Re: terrytnewzealand]
Tim Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 08/16/06
Posts: 192
Loc: California
i do not quite understand what dawkins is saying in the quote " they [creationists] fear what they believe to be its moral consequences." would you all care to enlighten me of what he is implying? thanks

Top
#20973 - 04/27/07 02:33 AM Re: Evidence for God [Re: Tim]
terrytnewzealand Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/02/06
Posts: 1031
Loc: Whangarei New Zealand
Tim. Absolutes go out the window. Humans are no longer a special creation with special privileges and responsibilities. Quoting Dawkins again:

"Notice now that 'pro-life' doesn't exactly mean pro life at all. It means pro-human life. This granting of uniquely special rights to cells of the species Homo sapiens is hard to reconcile with the fact of evolution".

Can you give any reason why many religious people oppose the teaching of evolution?

Top
#20975 - 04/27/07 03:22 AM Re: Evidence for God [Re: terrytnewzealand]
Ellis Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/08/07
Posts: 1490
Loc: Australia
Maybe because having been made in the image of himself by god humans are the only living things that can achieve goodness and eternal life, hence the dubious moral consequence. Without the cachet of evolution (and the made in the image ..etc) we are all exposed as just animals. Thinking ones sure, but still animals. So if you have a problem with that and feel you are just a bit special you will have problems with evolution. Most people don't, certainly creationism doesn't get much of a go here.

Top
#20977 - 04/27/07 08:11 AM Re: Evidence for God [Re: Ellis]
samwik Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/10/06
Posts: 1164
Loc: Colorado
I was surprised to learn that smart creationist and ID'ers don't deny that evolution occurs (present tense). What they react strongly to is the conclusion that God didn't start evolution. They also have issues with the usual interpretations of evolution's past.

Evolution is so dramatically persuasive that many people use it (incorrectly) as evidence that God is not "needed" to explain the origin of life. But even Darwin referred to God when speaking about the Origin of life, as Einstein also did regarding the Origin of the universe.

Not-so-smart creationist and ID'ers have a knee-jerk reaction to that misperception (God not needed), and think it is a true representation of evolution theory (and science in general).

-i think this post needs some work (clarification, suppl.), but maybe later.....

~SA

p.s.
Just because I say it's "incorrect" that God is not needed, DOESN'T mean I'd say it's correct that God is needed.
IMHO evolution doesn't imply anything about God at all (maybe that's their problem).
_________________________
Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.

Top
#20981 - 04/27/07 09:15 AM Re: Evidence for God [Re: samwik]
Blacknad Offline
Superstar

Registered: 10/05/05
Posts: 901
Loc: Coventry, England
Hi Samwick,

This is probably a slight misrepresentation of the ID position.

They simply say that there appears to be evidence of design in the universe and especially in the [human] genome. They would say it is like a well written piece of software.

They would then go on to say that our cause and effect understanding of the universe is that wherever you find complex information there is an organizing or designing mind.

They simply say the evidence demonstrates some form of designer.

They do not think that you can really know anything of the nature of the designer except that 'it designs'.

This is why ID has some agnostic adherents.

Most creationists would see ID as being just as mistaken as straight forward evolutionary theory - and have a dogmatic objection to anything that supports or gives credence to evolution (which ID certainly does).

Blacknad.

Top
#20982 - 04/27/07 09:18 AM Re: Evidence for God [Re: terrytnewzealand]
Blacknad Offline
Superstar

Registered: 10/05/05
Posts: 901
Loc: Coventry, England
Originally Posted By: terrytnewzealand
Can you give any reason why many religious people oppose the teaching of evolution?


Probably quite true, but it must be remembered that in the UK 45% of people do not beleive in evolutionary theory.

We are a secular nation with a very small percentage of Christians.

Blacknad.

Top
#21009 - 04/27/07 09:10 PM Re: Evidence for God [Re: Blacknad]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
In my opinion, GØD, is one with the eternal now, part and parcel of the whole process of evolution. This, IMHO, means that we need no longer be accidental victims of the evolutionary process; we have the potential, if we so choose to be one with GØD imaging and directing the process.
=============================
GØD, ONE WITH THE ETERNAL NOW
=============================
GØD'S one with knowledge, wisdom, life,
With goodness, order and design
As old as time, as young as youth,
GØD is within each cell of mine.

Now we are one with mother earth,
And one with water, ocean, sea.
We're also one with father sky,
And all-pervasive gravity.

Evolving within all space and time,
We're one with faith and hope and love,
We're one with GØD, the eternal now,
Around, within, below, above.

GØD'S Spirit's in each breath we take,
The root of justice and of peace,
Is one with health, with life and wealth,
Producing joys which ne'er will cease.
===============0000000000===============

I repeat: For me, GØD is not a human-like personal being--male or female--who goes around doing people-like things, to and for us. GØD is Spirit, within us, enabling us to evolve, if we so choose, to higher being.

WHY I USE THE SYMBOL GØD
Let others do as you choose, but one of the reasons I am not comfortable with the old way of writing the divine name is that it sets GØD apart as a kind of personal being separate and apart from us. I want to avoid this. If it doesn't matter to you, that is your choice.

BY THE WAY, I AM NOT THE FIRST ONE TO THINK THIS WAY
In the last century, theologian, Paul Tillich avoided personalizing the concept of deity by using the expression "the ground of all being", and "the ultimate reality"--meaning all that IS.

When I speak of GØD, the only verb I can use, comfortably, is the verb, 'to be'. Check out Exodus 3:14, where we have the Hebrew expression, YHWH, which is related the Hebrew verb, to be--Jehovah, in English, meaning "I am who I am...Or, I will be who I choose to be."

For me, GØD simply IS. Name anything that IS and, IMHO, it is in, and/or, related to GØD. In addition, GØD refers to that which is in and through all that is.

THE FREE-WILL BILL
By the way, I respect the right of atheists and agnostics, who choose not to be included. As human beings, we have the right to decide to be included, or not.

Do we all agree: Generally speakng, as human beings, we are free to choose to kill ourselves physically, mentally and spiritually, anytime.

I do.

However--in keeping with the Jewish salute, "l'hiem", TO LIFE!"--I prefer, LIFE!




Edited by Revlgking (04/28/07 01:25 AM)
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#21014 - 04/27/07 10:42 PM Re: Evidence for God [Re: Revlgking]
terrytnewzealand Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/02/06
Posts: 1031
Loc: Whangarei New Zealand
Ellis wrote:

"certainly creationism doesn't get much of a go here."

Not at the moment. But when I first joined the site was infested with creationists and IDers. No doubt some will return.

Blacknad wrote:

"it must be remembered that in the UK 45% of people do not believe in evolutionary theory. We are a secular nation with a very small percentage of Christians."

That suggests that all Christians in the UK oppose evolutionary theory! The 45% must be made up of Muslims, Jews etc. But, Blacky, that still doesn't explain the philosophical objection to the theory in those sections of society.

I agree with Samwik that evolution does not prove or disprove the existence of God.

Top
#21016 - 04/27/07 11:22 PM Re: Evidence for God [Re: terrytnewzealand]
Tim Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 08/16/06
Posts: 192
Loc: California
Yes, i would agree with that statement, too. That if evolution occured, it would not disprove the existence of God.

Top
#21022 - 04/28/07 01:56 AM Re: Evidence for God [Re: Tim]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
THE FOLLOWING IS AN INTERESTING STORY SENT TO ME BY A FRIEND:

One evening a wise grandfather told his grandson about a battle that goes on inside all people.

He said, "My son, the battle inside all of us is usually between two packs of animals.

One pack is evil. It is made up of animals called anger, envy, jealousy, sorrow, regret, greed, arrogance, self-pity, guilt, resentment, inferiority, lies, false pride, superiority, apathy, cynicism, despair and ego.

The other is made up of animals called joy, justice, peace, serenity, humility, kindness, benevolence, empathy, generosity, truth, and compassion, faith, hope, and love."

Then his grandfather asked: "Which pack do you think will win the battle?"

The grandson thought about it for a long minute.

Then the grandfather replied, "Take a guess."

The grandson responded: "I strongly suspect it would be the ones I choose to feed."

The grandfather was proud of his grandson's wisdom.
============================================================
And is it not up to us to make the decision which one we will feed?

_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
Page 31 of 35 < 1 2 ... 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 >



Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.