|
Location: UK
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,114
|
24-09-2010, 12:54 PM
Originally Posted by crumpetface 
but surely a living breathing thing is far more complex and intricate than an object,and even less likely to come about by chance? some folks may blindly believe and just 'let it be'-I don't. the bible was written by men-but inspired by God,as another post said. the bible is a message from God,a guide book for life, how has it survived 1000's of years of people trying to destroy it and misinterpret it and still remain essentially,as it was written(as proven by the dead sea scrolls) and still be the best selling book ever,if someone powerful wasn't protecting it?but my point is,even if you believe the bible is a load of twaddle(which I don't),how can we all have come about by a cosmic explosion(or whatever you want to call it)-to me,that is much more far fetched than intelligent design. people read books by supposedly 'clever' people and accept it as fact-even though it is still just a theory. What they never mention are the many scientists that have studied the same things and come to to the conclusion that life must have been created. Maybe some scientists aren't humble enough to accept that we have someone else to thank for our existence.
'I can never understand why folks are simply not content to say "let it be" and accept what they can't actually prove and don't know'---isn't this exactly what evolutionists do?How can anyone catagorically say that we evolved? as mentioned in my previous post-many 'facts' presented by evolutionists,aren't actually facts at all-just presented as such by scientists.
It is interesting that you say "someone" when you say "if someone powerfull wasn't protecting it" and "someone else to thank for our existence". That leads me to think that you think a person or something like ourselves was involved in some way. What we have to thank for our existence is mother nature and father time to be simplistic about it and there is plenty of proof for this. To say anything else, to me is typical of a humanbeing's arrogance. Look to archaeology for some answers, look to biology, chemistry and physics - yes they are sciences, but there is proof of what has been written readily there for those who have studied, experienced and learned. I also think you sadly underestimate how powerfull religious leaders and the church/s have been throughout history.
I have studied the the religions, the sciences, philosophy, geography, natural history etc., for most of my life - I am still learning - and I think the thing I would say is never to take things literally - look beyond, learn and decide for yourself, but make it a well rounded, educated decision. We cannot hope understand everything, and if people believe in a God then thats fine - because we do not know everything. If a person prefers to test and and question and continues to search all their life, then that also is fine. I don't believe people will go to heaven or hell based on what they believe. I question whether heaven and hell exist (except in people's mind and maybe here on earth).
I also think that we all have individual capacities and abilities for understanding and we all interpret things in our own way, which is fine. However, some things are hard cold facts which are proven and can be learned - other things cannot and if it helps, this is where faith has a place. We should not be scared to say it.
We could debate religion vs the sciences, as well as the philosophy forever and I think it is best to say that we will agree to differ.
Kind Regards - and may the force be with you (I know thats from Starwars and its not intended to be facetious).
|
|
Location: West London, UK
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,753
|
24-09-2010, 12:58 PM
Originally Posted by Jackbox
Because what ever side you fall on, we will all get one hell of a shock when we die, for those who are believers , the pearly gates are not there, and for those who dont they are
Personally, as you may have guessed
, I don't believe in an after life but if I'm wrong who's after life is it going to be?Here are a few of my options...
CofE - I think I'll be ok as although I'm a professed atheist I'm not evil, honest!
RC - could be in trouble here as although brought up a good RC girl my atheism puts me in a very sticky spot.
Islam - Straight to Jahannam aka hell
Hinduism - reincarnated as a dog maybe?
Norse - well I'm not going to make it to Valhalla as I am unlikely to die in battle!
Which is it going to be? Or will I just live on in the memories of those that loved me? I'll happily settle for that. My Granny always told my Grandad she was going to use him to grow tomatoes over, I'd be happy for someone to do that! I like to be useful.
J.
|
|
|
|
Location: West London, UK
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,753
|
24-09-2010, 01:03 PM
Originally Posted by AshMan
when we christians say the word of God we mean God inspired they were still written by men wether in narative (the gospels) or poetic (psalms) forms. So they do come with there own biases in what is mentioned and emphasised on. Also rules will change due to the place, context and audience. I believe the bible should be acepted as it is but we must work to interpret what it meant at the time as obviously there culture was very very different. For this i try to look up the aramic, hebrew, or greek words to uncover the truest meaning and also study the culture and audience for which particular scripturesd are written. I would also not base an understand of scripture on a verse alone but read at least the chapter if not the whole bok to understand its context.
i dont thing such a big text read by so many people could ever be interpreted the same way by everybody. There are a few things in the bible most would agree have to be believed and accepted to be called a true christian, while there are other things such as the eating of pork, or which day to sabbath that many will agree to disagree on as advised in romans 14.
What an eminently sensible and responsible approach. I may disagree with you but I can totally see what you are doing.
My gripe with religion is that you are in the tiny minority and the vast majority simply pick and choose (as I did) to justify their actions. And down the centuries some of those actions have been horrendous.
J.
|
|
|
|
Location: dullsville
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,241
|
|
|
Location: UK
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 25
|
24-09-2010, 02:35 PM
'There is not 1 shred of evidence that supports intelligent design/creationism'-maybe thats because you don't want to see it-as i said before,i see it every day in the world around me.
'Maybe some theists are just too egocentrical'-ask anyone one knows me,i wouldn't know what egocentrical was if it landed on my head,i am the shyest,most unconfident person in the world-but i do know what i believe about where we came from
http://www.s8int.com/Godexists.html
Anthropological facial ‘reconstruction’ – recognizing the fallacies, ‘unembracing’ the errors, and realizing method limits
C.N. Stephan
pages 193-200-
(i think you have to login to science & justice to look at this)
http://www.discovery.org/scripts/vie...oad.php?id=119
|
|
|
|
Location: UK
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 25
|
24-09-2010, 02:49 PM
Originally Posted by aerolor
I don't think the bible is a load of "twaddle" as you say crumpetface, but you do have to take into account the history - how old these writings are and where the origins of the writings come from - both the old testament and the New testament.
It is interesting that you say "someone" when you say "if someone powerfull wasn't protecting it" and "someone else to thank for our existence". That leads me to think that you think a person or something like ourselves was involved in some way. What we have to thank for our existence is mother nature and father time to be simplistic about it and there is plenty of proof for this. To say anything else, to me is typical of a humanbeing's arrogance. Look to archaeology for some answers, look to biology, chemistry and physics - yes they are sciences, but there is proof of what has been written readily there for those who have studied, experienced and learned. I also think you sadly underestimate how powerfull religious leaders and the church/s have been throughout history.
I have studied the the religions, the sciences, philosophy, geography, natural history etc., for most of my life - I am still learning - and I think the thing I would say is never to take things literally - look beyond, learn and decide for yourself, but make it a well rounded, educated decision. We cannot hope understand everything, and if people believe in a God then thats fine - because we do not know everything. If a person prefers to test and and question and continues to search all their life, then that also is fine. I don't believe people will go to heaven or hell based on what they believe. I question whether heaven and hell exist (except in people's mind and maybe here on earth).
I also think that we all have individual capacities and abilities for understanding and we all interpret things in our own way, which is fine. However, some things are hard cold facts which are proven and can be learned - other things cannot and if it helps, this is where faith has a place. We should not be scared to say it.
We could debate religion vs the sciences, as well as the philosophy forever and I think it is best to say that we will agree to differ.
Kind Regards - and may the force be with you (I know thats from Starwars and its not intended to be facetious).
anyway,thank you for being open minded and nice
|
|
|
Location: Stockton on Tees
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,005
|
24-09-2010, 02:50 PM
Here's something else thats bugging me.
One of the beliefs of an after life is that you're reunited with loved ones etc but, if there is a heaven and a hell how is that going to be possible all of the time.
And as one persons heaven is anothers hell, who decides which is which, or is it tailor made to suit the individual?
|
|
|
Location: UK
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 4,616
|
24-09-2010, 03:03 PM
Originally Posted by tazer
Interesting thought Krusewalker.
Here's something else thats bugging me.
One of the beliefs of an after life is that you're reunited with loved ones etc but, if there is a heaven and a hell how is that going to be possible all of the time.
And as one persons heaven is anothers hell, who decides which is which, or is it tailor made to suit the individual?
|
|
|
|
Location: West London, UK
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,753
|
24-09-2010, 03:20 PM
Originally Posted by crumpetface
okay,because i'm happy to admit i'm not a scientist and not particularly clever-here are some interesting links from clever people-i also admit that some of these people still believe in evolution-but they have accepted that some of the 'props' holding up the evolutionary theory are not 'fact'
So I reiterate - Scientists look for 'evidence' not 'facts' and are prepared to change their theories if new evidence arises. However to make the leap that just because we can't explain or understand something that it must be the work of god is just too much of a leap of faith.
And that's the great thing about science! If new evidence comes to light theories are changed, no one says you have to believe this and it is set in stone, they say here is our theory and here is evidence we have that has led us to these theories. Then other scientists go, ah, but what about x, y or z, or but have you considered this interpretation? And no one says you must just believe this because we say so!
'There is not 1 shred of evidence that supports intelligent design/creationism'-maybe thats because you don't want to see it-as i said before,i see it every day in the world around me.
It's not about me it's about science! One should look at the evidence to then work towards an explanation. What you see in the world around you that you can't explain you choose to explain by saying 'god did it', sorry but that is just not a convincing argument for me.
'Maybe some theists are just too egocentrical'-ask anyone one knows me,i wouldn't know what egocentrical was if it landed on my head,i am the shyest,most unconfident person in the world-but i do know what i believe about where we came from
Again I'm sorry but just saying "I know what I believe" is not rational argument.
http://www.s8int.com/Godexists.html
This links to an article about Antony Flew, one old philosopher suddenly finding god at 81 (maybe he's hedging his bets
)doesn't greatly effect the body of evidence.Anthropological facial ‘reconstruction’ – recognizing the fallacies, ‘unembracing’ the errors, and realizing method limits
C.N. Stephan
pages 193-200-
(i think you have to login to science & justice to look at this)
Link?
http://www.discovery.org/scripts/vie...oad.php?id=119
http://www.skepdic.com/cambrian.html
J.
|
|