Thinking can undermine religious faith

[lawrocket 3]

I concur. This was part of the Christian move to teach creationism. But - the Christians themselves are trying to move philosophy into the realm of science.

The atheists fucked up and went with an argument of anti-science instead of calling it philosphy. Instead of calling the ID proponents "anti-science" - which is something that is intended to be an assault on them - they could have much more easily and effectively framed them as "philosophers."

Philosophy is not anti-science. Science is not anti-philosphy. Instead of focusing on what Intelligent Design IS they are spending a lot of time calling the believers anti-science. Which will continue conflict.

It's the same thing in the climate debate. When political ramifications are disputed, the deniers are called "anti-science." When scientists take political positions, they claim it is "science" and therefore those who disagree are "anti-science."

We see it everywhere where the issues are confused. This is not to say that there are not "anti-science" people out there. There are. But I see that most arguments on ID are really philosophical arguments that are painted as scientific ones.

Introducing ID into a science curriculum is nonsensical. Keeping ID out of a philosophical curriculum is also bad, in my opinion, because creationism as a philosophical underpinning has some disputable merit. Certainly we don't ban the works of Ptolemy from philosophy. We'll even STUDY Ptolemy in the history of science.

Religion deserves is place in that same discussion. And not acknowledging it because it is religious is, in my opinion, more dangerous than stamping it out. I think that the focus should be more on calling Intelligent Design what it IS versus arguing what it isn't.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[RonD1120 62]

Quote

Speaking of thinking, how can you reconcile voting for someone who denies the trinity, while voting against someone who has professed his faith in it?

How can one be a Christian when beleiving that Jesus and Satan were flesh and blood brothers on another planet?

The vote, my vote, will be cast for POTUS, not savior. America tried to elect one of those the last term. It didn't work out well for the country.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[RonD1120 62]

Quote

Quote

The mind is a useful tool only. When you make it your master you head down the path to destruction and spiritual death.

lolwut?

Could you elaborate a bit here? I'm not familiar with the teachings of what ever religious cult it is where you picked up these words of wisdom.

PS: If they offer you Cool-Aid Flavor-Aid, it's best to politely decline the offer, btw.

Based on our previous communications, I don't think it would help your understanding. However, I will venture on to the stage of the theatre of the absurd once again. It is one of those deep concepts, like the sound of one hand clapping.

Basically, you can't think your way to spiritual life. It is antithetical to the concept of faith. The latter requires surrender to a higher power and a supernatural communication, through prayer and or meditation, with that power. That communication provides direction and power in life that goes above and beyond all levels of conscious learning. Listen to the still small voice within and stop the internal dialogue.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[normiss 906]

Medication?

Suddenly a LOT of things make sense...

[jakee 1,611]

Quote

Absolutely. But what is, "Intelligent design?" Nothing more than another explanation of WHY the universe was created.

No it isn't. In fact, in order to try and insinuate it into the science curriculum, Intelligent Design is quite specifically not an explanation of WHY the universe was created, merely an idea about HOW some parts of it were created.

So... kinda the exact opposite of what you want your point to be.

Quote

Bu, no, the atheist isn't happy with that. The atheist is instead more intent on bashing the religious. And the religious is more intent on bashing the atheist. Agreeing to disagree isn't an easy thing to do, and by blurring the lines between science and philosophy it makes more to argue about.

You're attacking a strawman.

Quote

But if you think about it, the fate of the universe has some religious issues. Michio Kaku described it as the Christian version of fate is of the Apocalypse being fire and brimstone, which tracked with the version of the end of the universe that was predicted up until the 1990's (gravity would eventually win and the universe would collapse in on itself). Meanwhile, Nordics had their version of the universe ending in a world of cold and ice, and considering thermodynamics and the acceleration of the expansion of the universe, it appears that the vision of the religions in the North is more accurate. The universe will indeed die very cold. It's not an opinion - it's the law.

How do superficial similarities mean the end of the universe has religious issues? What are you trying to say?

Quote

Even Galileo's case has been spun in an anti-religious way. Galileo's discovery didn't bother the church at all. A Cardinal was asked and mentioned that the Bible tells us how to go to Heaven, not how the heavens go.

That's not spin, that's lying. 1 Cardinal =! the church.

Quote

Thinking CAN undermine religious faith. Thinking can also reaffirm it. But it takes actual thought to separate philosophy from science. it takes thought to avoid selection bias.

And it takes immense intellectual dishonesty to argue that mainstream religion confines itself to issues outside of science.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[RonD1120 62]

Quote

Medication?

Suddenly a LOT of things make sense...

OOPS! Thank you for your critical eye.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[normiss 906]

Uncomfortably Freudian I'm sure.

[jakee 1,611]

Quote

The atheists fucked up and went with an argument of anti-science instead of calling it philosphy. Instead of calling the ID proponents "anti-science" - which is something that is intended to be an assault on them - they could have much more easily and effectively framed them as "philosophers."

Philosophy is not anti-science. Science is not anti-philosphy. Instead of focusing on what Intelligent Design IS they are spending a lot of time calling the believers anti-science. Which will continue conflict.

Wow. No dude, you fucked up by not knowing what Intelligent Design is. Intelligent Design is anti-science. That's all it is. It consists of a string of attempts to poke holes in very specific aspects of evolutionary theory, usually by means of actually lying about what we know is possible.

How on earth would you frame Intelligent Design as philosophy? Tell me what aspect of Intelligent Design is philosophical when the only thing it is concerned with, and they are very explicit on this point, is poking holes in the science of evolution?

Quote

I think that the focus should be more on calling Intelligent Design what it IS versus arguing what it isn't.

Apart from cycnical pseudo-science, what is it?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[RonD1120 62]

Quote

Uncomfortably Freudian I'm sure.

Not uncomfortable but quite possibly Freudian, considering my professional background.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Wow. No dude, you fucked up by not knowing what Intelligent Design is. Intelligent Design is anti-science.

On the basis of my looking at the Intelligent Design issue again, allow me to reverse my previously stated opinions on it.

I fuck up, too.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[jakee 1,611]

Quote

Quote

Wow. No dude, you fucked up by not knowing what Intelligent Design is. Intelligent Design is anti-science.

On the basis of my looking at the Intelligent Design issue again, allow me to reverse my previously stated opinions on it.

I fuck up, too.

Kudos.



You're still wrong on the Galileo issue as well though, BTW.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Bolas 5]

Quote

if you think about it, the fate of the universe has some religious issues. Michio Kaku described it as the Christian version of fate is of the Apocalypse being fire and brimstone, which tracked with the version of the end of the universe that was predicted up until the 1990's (gravity would eventually win and the universe would collapse in on itself). Meanwhile, Nordics had their version of the universe ending in a world of cold and ice, and considering thermodynamics and the acceleration of the expansion of the universe, it appears that the vision of the religions in the North is more accurate. The universe will indeed die very cold. It's not an opinion - it's the law.

So because people from a cold climate believed that the apocalypse would be cold...

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[lawrocket 3]

You aren't married yet. You don't know what cold is.

But you'll find out.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

It's funny how you think I hate,

What's funny is that you read that into my post as if it was directed at anyone in particular.

Quote

" Hate the beliefs and not the believer" is my motto.

I don't remember any religion's documentation saying that and I have never heard a religious person saying that and I never knew it was a popular Christian phrase...but I'll take your word for it.

My opposition to that is this...
Why hate anyone? Why does it bother you that others have religious beliefs? Why do you feel it necessary to point out to them that your beliefs say that they are wrong?

Quote

Outside of this site, I rarely espouse my atheism to anyone,

I don't have any problem with you espousing your atheism to any one, in or outside of here. An intelligent discussion is a good thing. What causes problems is when the hate comes out, from either side of the fence, and the "I'm right, you're wrong" BS starts...now we are arguing, not discussing.

Atheist nuts beating down religions is no more proper than religious nuts beating down atheists.

Quote

I think sitting behind a keyboard( Or standing over a phone) gives us a little more courage then we might normally muster.

All too true, eh?


There was the reasoning presented by someone in another thread that they don't agree with mixing religion and politics. I completely understand that in a logical sort of way. However, I wouldn't automatically reject out of hand any suggestion for political improvement based simply on the source. It's the old evaluate the advice and not the advisor trick.

"Your idea sucks because you are an atheist"
"Your idea sucks because you are a religious person."
Both approaches suck equally.

This country is based on majority rule. What has caused major problems such as these arguments is the idea of "screw the majority, what about ME?"
Where do you stand on that idea?

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

So you' agree that theology is pointless?

Quote

No jakee, you missed the point entirely. the arguments are pointless.

Quote

So why is it only atheists you criticize for saying pointless things?

It's the atheists who are being so irrationally adamant about bashing religious beliefs and those who believe. And their arguments have been so far off base as to be quite laughable. "Prove God exists" is one of the better examples.

Look around...how many anti-religion threads have been started as opposed to pro-religion ones. Atheists quite often rail against religion being "shoved down my throat". What we are seeing here in DZ.com is a much more prolific contingent of both agnostics and atheists railing and shoving their beliefs. YMMV.

I'm kinda the 'support the underdog' kind of guy you might say...and have fun with that if you like. Really, I'm opposed to arguments of any kind. If you can't discuss differences intelligently and calmly, then do us all a favor and just go away. If you can't accept the fact that people are different and if you can't deal with that rationally, do us all a favor and just go away...or get help for it. They make good meds that will help smooth out the ups and downs.

Quote

So only agnostics and believers can discuss "the actual issues"?

I don't know where you came up with that but you are welcome to it. Claim it as your own statement, not mine.

Quote

What are the "actual issues"?

You tell me. Arguing "I'm right, you are wrong" is NOT the issue. You tell me why it's important for you to bash religions. So far you have not offered anything relevant towards that end.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[Marinus 0]

Quote

Based on our previous communications, I don't think it would help your understanding.

Actually I'm quite bright, so there's nothing wrong with my understanding, it's more like terms like "spiritual death" don't make sense. It's just religious lingo that only make sense if you abandon rational thought which according to you is the way to roll (I think)

Quote

It is one of those deep concepts, like the sound of one hand clapping.

Actually that's not deep at all, it's comparable with meditating on the colour of laughter. Unless you're insane or under the influence of hallucinogenics those questions don't make sense at all.

Quote

Basically, you can't think your way to spiritual life. It is antithetical to the concept of faith.

So faith works best if you stop using your mind? I think I agree with that.

Quote

The latter requires surrender to a higher power and a supernatural communication, through prayer and or meditation, with that power. That communication provides direction and power in life that goes above and beyond all levels of conscious learning.

So this Higher Power pretty much uses you as a puppet or does it only give direction and you decide for yourself if you use it? If I'm not mistaken you're repeating Alcoholics Anonymous nonsense here, aren't you?

Quote

Listen to the still small voice within and stop the internal dialogue.

There's an internal monologue which kind of makes sense because I'm the only one in my head, if I start hearing voices and act on that, it's time for some serious medication not meditation.

[RonD1120 62]

Quote

So this Higher Power pretty much uses you as a puppet or does it only give direction and you decide for yourself if you use it? If I'm not mistaken you're repeating Alcoholics Anonymous nonsense here, aren't you?

Each of us has a free will to make decisions, no puppeteering involved. AA/NA is not nonsense. It is a very successful recovery program worldwide.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[Marinus 0]

Quote

Each of us has a free will to make decisions, no puppeteering involved.

If you defy God at times, it's not puppeteering, but if you follow Her advise slavishly.... Do you defy God a lot?

Quote

AA/NA is not nonsense. It is a very successful recovery program worldwide.

AA/NA is irrational nonsense. That wouldn't be a problem if it actually worked, but the effect of 12 steps programs is apparently very hard to measure. This could because it has hardly an effect or no effect at all. To me it looks like the next scheme to sell God to weak members of society, in this case people who go through withdrawal. Until it's proven that AA/NA is effective in the treatment of addiction I consider it to be (something akin to) quack medicine at best. Quack medicine that looks remarkably like organized religion or even a religious cult.

[Marinus 0]

Quote

It's the reason why atheists get so stressed out when others express the facts behind their lack of belief. If they see these facts they may have to think about them, and that may totally break their insecure faith and turn them to the 'dark side'.

I don't think atheists doubt their atheism a lot. After all most atheists came to their position by rational thinking. When relis whine about atheist arrogance, they're really whining about the confidence atheists have in their stance towards God. Besides, atheists have usually literally nothing to loose religion wise.

Religious folks OTOH have to reconcile talking snakes, world wide floods and water-walking Jews with reality.

[RonD1120 62]

Quote

Quote

Each of us has a free will to make decisions, no puppeteering involved.

Quote

If you defy God at times, it's not puppeteering, but if you follow Her advise slavishly.... Do you defy God a lot?

That statement makes no sense to me.

Quote

AA/NA is not nonsense. It is a very successful recovery program worldwide.

Quote

AA/NA is irrational nonsense. That wouldn't be a problem if it actually worked, but the effect of 12 steps programs is apparently very hard to measure. This could because it has hardly an effect or no effect at all. To me it looks like the next scheme to sell God to weak members of society, in this case people who go through withdrawal. Until it's proven that AA/NA is effective in the treatment of addiction I consider it to be (something akin to) quack medicine at best. Quack medicine that looks remarkably like organized religion or even a religious cult.

It is a support program with a plan that addicts need. Is it the only way, no. Is it a proven successful way for many, yes.

That is all I have to say.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[jakee 1,611]

Quote

It's the atheists who are being so irrationally adamant about bashing religious beliefs and those who believe. And their arguments have been so far off base as to be quite laughable. "Prove God exists" is one of the better examples.

But you've just agreed that theology as a whole is just as pointless as you believe that question to be. So why only basgh atheists for it?

Quote

Look around...how many anti-religion threads have been started as opposed to pro-religion ones. Atheists quite often rail against religion being "shoved down my throat". What we are seeing here in DZ.com is a much more prolific contingent of both agnostics and atheists railing and shoving their beliefs. YMMV.

A trend which is completely reveresed in the outside world.

Quote

I'm kinda the 'support the underdog' kind of guy you might say

So if we were having this discussion in the real world you would be anti-religion?

Quote

I don't know where you came up with that but you are welcome to it. Claim it as your own statement, not mine.

I got it from where you said atheists don't discuss the actual issues.

Quote

You tell me. Arguing "I'm right, you are wrong" is NOT the issue.

No, you tell me. You brought it up so how am I supposed to know what you're talking about?

What are the "actual issues" that atheists can't discuss?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[maadmax 0]

It's the reason why atheists get so stressed out when others express the facts behind their lack of belief. If they see these facts they may have to think about them, and that may totally break their insecure faith and turn them to the 'dark side'.

I don't think atheists doubt their atheism a lot. After all most atheists came to their position by rational thinking. When relis whine about atheist arrogance, they're really whining about the confidence atheists have in their stance towards God. Besides, atheists have usually literally nothing to loose religion wise.

Religious folks OTOH have to reconcile talking snakes, world wide floods and water-walking Jews with reality.

[Marinus 0]

Is this some variation on the theme "We don't understand everything, therefore God exists"?

[Marinus 0]

Quote

That statement makes no sense to me.

You claim God advises you what to do, and if you slavishly follow that advise you're nothing but a puppet. So I wondered if you ever disobeyed god to be more human.

Quote

Is it a proven successful way for many, yes.

From what I know AA has a success rate that's about the same as no treatment at all, which is actually a surprisingly good result if you take into account that the "program" is unqualified drunks treating other drunks. All AA does is keeping addicts away from better treatments the "surrendering to God" and spreading lies/nonsense about addiction, including the lie that AA is a very successful way to quit drinking.

[popsjumper 2]

Well, since you need guidance, here's a tip. You may have missed it so here's some food for thought:

There was the reasoning presented by someone in another thread that they don't agree with mixing religion and politics.

Can you discuss a relevant political topic without falling back on a belief system whether it be religion or atheism?

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239