Big time. Their treatment of women is disgusting.Orthodox Judaism?
My wife and I were just having this conversation last night. Except for the much wider use of terrorism, extremist Islam and super Hasidic Judaism seem to have a good bit in common.
Big time. Their treatment of women is disgusting.Orthodox Judaism?
I get that. But what is most religion going to tell you? That there is a creator, and said creator put all the rules of physics in place. So if you really wanted to debate this, you'd have to go a step further and say that everything starts over again, not just humanity.Perhaps this is better suited for the religion thread, but the point being that if you were to hit the reset button on humanity ala The Good Place judge:Religious books contain quite a bit of history, and use knowledge at the time they were written to tell stories/parables of the religion they are teaching. So yeah, he's right but....so?
When you start over, 2+2 is still going to be 4. The Pythagorean theory will still be valid. When you have a pure substance that has three atoms, one with 8 protons and the other two with 1 proton covalently bound together, they'll be in a bent formation, and if you have a bucket of them they'll be liquid between 0°C and 100°C. A ball will accelerate toward earth at 9.8 m/sec^2. These things will all still be true, and will all be rediscovered.
Will all the Roman gods be rewritten exactly as they are? Will the Christian bible be rewritten exactly as is and will the interpretations of those writings be exactly as they are? Will Scientology still be a thing? Maybe... but most likely only if you go with Shmenguin's no free will theory which sort of violates what most Christians believe anyways.
The point is that science proves itself over and over. Multiple people do the experiments and they come to the same results over and over. So the idea that it takes "faith" to believe in science is a stretch at best, certainly not the same faith that it takes to believe in a religion.
Yeah... "the bible is true because it says it's true" does nothing for me and many others.Source of the post yet so many people think that it just takes a few Bible verses and people will convert.
Yeah, there are obviously separate roots to religions around the world, but even within a particular religion, there are branchings of beliefs and teachings. The king James bible is how many translations removed from the original writings?Source of the post The debate regarding multiple religions is a game of telephone in my opinion.
If all history books were burned, did Hitler still exist? Of course, he did. So did Mohamed, Jesus, etc.Perhaps this is better suited for the religion thread, but the point being that if you were to hit the reset button on humanity ala The Good Place judge:Religious books contain quite a bit of history, and use knowledge at the time they were written to tell stories/parables of the religion they are teaching. So yeah, he's right but....so?
When you start over, 2+2 is still going to be 4. The Pythagorean theory will still be valid. When you have a pure substance that has three atoms, one with 8 protons and the other two with 1 proton covalently bound together, they'll be in a bent formation, and if you have a bucket of them they'll be liquid between 0°C and 100°C. A ball will accelerate toward earth at 9.8 m/sec^2. These things will all still be true, and will all be rediscovered.
Will all the Roman gods be rewritten exactly as they are? Will the Christian bible be rewritten exactly as is and will the interpretations of those writings be exactly as they are? Will Scientology still be a thing? Maybe... but most likely only if you go with Shmenguin's no free will theory which sort of violates what most Christians believe anyways.
The point is that science proves itself over and over. Multiple people do the experiments and they come to the same results over and over. So the idea that it takes "faith" to believe in science is a stretch at best, certainly not the same faith that it takes to believe in a religion.
Right, and that's exactly the point. Even if they existed, but all record of them is gone, that record is never coming back. Versions of them or similar beings might, but they are lost never to return again in their exact form.Source of the post If all history books were burned, did Hitler still exist? Of course, he did. So did Mohamed, Jesus, etc.
Unless, one of the religions actually is the word of god... if one of the hundreds (thousands?) of religions actually is the spoken word of god, then yeah. It'd likely come back the same way.To take this in another direction (one that might not even be worth thinking about): If we started at 0 tomorrow, with everyone's mind erased and society starting over... science stuff will get rediscovered with the same conclusions, as C2I has said. What happens with religion? I think the general themes would still be there, but the world shaped those things then, and would shape them differently now. So I don't know that "Christianity" would form into the same thing again.
The difference is one was written knowingly as fiction and one was written because it was believed to be fact. That's why the comparison is kind of insulting. There are obviously Old testament teachings from before the time of the written word that were passed down that are parables, but late in that book and the entirety of the New Testament are written as contemporary accounts of life during those times. They may place divine intent onto natural occurring's and such, but they're not works created with the intent of fiction.[snip]I see no difference between the bible and harry potter. They're books about magical things and a savior that dies and is risen from the dead to save the world against evil. If that's insulting, I'm sorry, but that's truly how I feel about it. [snip]
Since Christianity follows the life and teachings of Jesus Christ, and you just expunged him from existence, a la the Hitler reference, Christianity would not come back unless he himself came back a second time.Unless, one of the religions actually is the word of god... if one of the hundreds (thousands?) of religions actually is the spoken word of god, then yeah. It'd likely come back the same way.To take this in another direction (one that might not even be worth thinking about): If we started at 0 tomorrow, with everyone's mind erased and society starting over... science stuff will get rediscovered with the same conclusions, as C2I has said. What happens with religion? I think the general themes would still be there, but the world shaped those things then, and would shape them differently now. So I don't know that "Christianity" would form into the same thing again.
Right... intent is the big word there. If some guy today started writing about miracles and things that seem/are magical and/or devine with the intent of it not being fiction, does that matter? Not to me. So really the only difference (again, to me...) is that one is old and broadly accepted where the other is new and not.The difference is one was written knowingly as fiction and one was written because it was believed to be fact. That's why the comparison is kind of insulting. There are obviously Old testament teachings from before the time of the written word that were passed down that are parables, but late in that book and the entirety of the New Testament are written as contemporary accounts of life during those times. They may place divine intent onto natural occurring's and such, but they're not works created with the intent of fiction.[snip]I see no difference between the bible and harry potter. They're books about magical things and a savior that dies and is risen from the dead to save the world against evil. If that's insulting, I'm sorry, but that's truly how I feel about it. [snip]
He's due back soon, isn't he?Since Christianity follows the life and teachings of Jesus Christ, and you just expunged him from existence, a la the Hitler reference, Christianity would not come back unless he himself came back a second time.Unless, one of the religions actually is the word of god... if one of the hundreds (thousands?) of religions actually is the spoken word of god, then yeah. It'd likely come back the same way.To take this in another direction (one that might not even be worth thinking about): If we started at 0 tomorrow, with everyone's mind erased and society starting over... science stuff will get rediscovered with the same conclusions, as C2I has said. What happens with religion? I think the general themes would still be there, but the world shaped those things then, and would shape them differently now. So I don't know that "Christianity" would form into the same thing again.
I guess I can see the comparison in that light.Right... intent is the big word there. If some guy today started writing about miracles and things that seem/are magical and/or devine with the intent of it not being fiction, does that matter? Not to me. So really the only difference (again, to me...) is that one is old and broadly accepted where the other is new and not.The difference is one was written knowingly as fiction and one was written because it was believed to be fact. That's why the comparison is kind of insulting. There are obviously Old testament teachings from before the time of the written word that were passed down that are parables, but late in that book and the entirety of the New Testament are written as contemporary accounts of life during those times. They may place divine intent onto natural occurring's and such, but they're not works created with the intent of fiction.[snip]I see no difference between the bible and harry potter. They're books about magical things and a savior that dies and is risen from the dead to save the world against evil. If that's insulting, I'm sorry, but that's truly how I feel about it. [snip]
Deacon nutz has a certain ring to it.Not apropos of this conversation, but I was ordained as a deacon yesterday. That was pretty cool.
Good stuff. I've tried to describe this before, but to me science is itself just another language. It's a way to describe our experiences through a medium that we can all agree upon, but it is man made and therefore imperfect. It's like an asymptotic curve where human understanding is always increasing with time, but will never reach the pinnacle of perfect understanding. It's not in our nature to have that ability, as we ourselves are fallible, mortal creatures.If all history books were burned, did Hitler still exist? Of course, he did. So did Mohamed, Jesus, etc.Perhaps this is better suited for the religion thread, but the point being that if you were to hit the reset button on humanity ala The Good Place judge:Religious books contain quite a bit of history, and use knowledge at the time they were written to tell stories/parables of the religion they are teaching. So yeah, he's right but....so?
When you start over, 2+2 is still going to be 4. The Pythagorean theory will still be valid. When you have a pure substance that has three atoms, one with 8 protons and the other two with 1 proton covalently bound together, they'll be in a bent formation, and if you have a bucket of them they'll be liquid between 0°C and 100°C. A ball will accelerate toward earth at 9.8 m/sec^2. These things will all still be true, and will all be rediscovered.
Will all the Roman gods be rewritten exactly as they are? Will the Christian bible be rewritten exactly as is and will the interpretations of those writings be exactly as they are? Will Scientology still be a thing? Maybe... but most likely only if you go with Shmenguin's no free will theory which sort of violates what most Christians believe anyways.
The point is that science proves itself over and over. Multiple people do the experiments and they come to the same results over and over. So the idea that it takes "faith" to believe in science is a stretch at best, certainly not the same faith that it takes to believe in a religion.
I believe Monotheism would absolutely come back if you destroyed all religious texts, but that's not to say that it's "correct." And it would come back in a different form as opposed to science's concrete numbers.
What's more interesting from a religious perspective is the spiritual interconnectedness that has been discussed in a religious context can now be talked about through quantum entanglement today. What's been described as the Holy Spirit in Christianity can be observed scientifically at the quantum level.
Likewise, for centuries prayer was a silent time of reflection which science today can show the benefits of meditation and manifestation.
These cosmic truths have been practiced by religions for years and science is now able to quantify their benefits and behavior. Does that mean religion isn't necessary, or just that we're describing the same thing in different languages. The Big Bang for instance doesn't eliminate a Deity, it just moves human understanding another step with more questions to follow.
Right, which is why I don't believe it has to be science vs religion. They can coexist. And you can have science without religion. But it can't be the other way. I don't believe you can be a rational human being and solely believe in religion while discounting the qualitative findings science has provided.I think very few scientist, agnostics, or atheists and certainly not Gervais (who sparked this whole conversation) would say that science can or ever will refute the idea of some sort of deity. If those kind of people exists: yes... they would be having a faith in something that isn't provable. But they are such a small subset of the scientists and human beings that I'm not sure it's worth discussing further than they're extremists.
I agree with your point on Jesus. I agree with many of his teachings. I couldn't care less if he actually is the son of god or not, they're good lessons and should be followed. But other religions have good moral teachings as well. Care and compassion are not patented by Christianity. There were religions/philosophies before Jesus came around that taught similar things. There are religions that will come later that teach the same thing.
Users browsing this forum: dodint, FlightlessBird and 120 guests