OT: The religion thead...

[odessa]

The next great leap in human evolution will be to rid ourselves of religion, all we have to do is get over our fear of death and the unknown. I have never met anyone with 'deeply held' ( ie deeply indocrinated ) beliefs who would even consider the slightest chance that they could be wrong .... it's impossible.

Compare that with a scientist, who could work for years on a belief ... literally their whole life and be proved wrong yet still embrace and welcome a new way of thinking. That's the difference between the two mindsets. I will always have my feet planted in the science camp, but should real, actual physical proof that I am wrong be presented to me I would accept I'm wrong.



ps please don't try to provide me with any, I've heard it all before 

[EEVblog]

What you saying, Dave? They are everywhere. Turn on your tv and watch our presidents and politicians.

Unfortunately you are right. Mass delusion reigns supreme   
Because it's good politics, of course...
Less so in politics here thankfully, at least we have an openly atheist prime minster. But of course she doesn't have the balls (metaphorically speaking) to assert the position and still panders to the religious influence 

Dave.

[G7PSK]

The argument goes, It takes an intelligent being like ourselves to create something like a computer therefore it must take an intelligent being to create us. The other argument is it must take an intelligent god being to create a universe out of a big bang consisting of nothing.

The same logic requires that the intelligent creator being must be created by another intelligent creator being and so infinite-um.

The obvious question one has to ask oneself is who or what created the first creating intelligent creator.

The religious people always just answer that god just is and needs no creator, but if god needs no creator in order to be the supreme intelligence why do we need a god creator in order to be, Its more a case of man created god in his own image than god created man in his.     

[odessa]

^^ Exactly ^^

[A Hellene]

Alright. Let's push it a little further...

I remember watching a very disturbing documentary that really shocked me, called "Jesus Camp (2006)". It is about child abuse and brainwashing by the American Evangelical Christian community, where is shown how American children are being intellectually immobilized in the name of their "savior." Intellectually immobilized, with the blessings of their parents...

It is very sad to watch how these people turn sweet little children into bloodthirsty militant whackos, awaiting to take lives in the name of their creepy Lord (= owner), and female recruiters ready to use their sexuality in order to sign up yet another clueless victim. It also comes dimly into sight how they make Christians accept the alleged superiority of the Jewish/Zionist people, religion and policies of the self-chosen ones, according to the Abrahamic religions. You see, the Tetragrammaton (= YHWH: "he who is") ruled that some people (the Israelites) are more equal that all the others (The Christians, the Muslims and the Heathens) while he has also disinherited some of the others (the Muslims); and this is perfectly accepted by them all --especially by the lesser equal ones...
Does this form of Divide and Conquer make any sense? Of course, it seems it makes perfect sense to all of the others...

For example, what is exactly happening at the occupied Palestinian territories? Answer: Ethnic cleansing, where armed religious fanatics are entering the Palestinian land, humiliating the natives, demolishing their houses, occasionally murdering them, and building Jews-only colonies, defying the international laws and blindly following their racist dogmatic agenda. And no one is doing something about it. It is very sad that this situation is perfectly justified in most people's minds because some special people (who say that they hear voices in their heads, and that's alright) claim that "this is God's Will", and that makes ethnic cleansing alright, too, despite of humanity having already accused and convicted the Nazis for doing the same thing to a certain minority during WWII...
What kind of charade is this?

By the way, I have nothing against the Israeli people; I realise that they are just doing what they are told or forced to do, and I am sure that if their ruthless agitators leave them alone they will find a way to peacefully coexist with the natives.

Taking it a step further, if there is such a thing as the god the religions claim that exists, what kind of a malevolent god would that be, pushing people to live such lives and die such deaths? Ah, please, do not bother to answer that; I've heard it before: He tests the faith of the others, which euphemistically means that someone is trying to keep the fear of the flock alive and kicking...

This is a small piece of advice for anyone really looking for answers in the religious books; even though searching for truths within these absurd myths (sugarcoated with the universally accepted abstract concepts of love and forgiveness) sounds to be a circular reasoning fallacy: To become able to understand the so-called Holly Books of those religions, just substitute the word "God" with the word "priesthood". This way, "The God said..." becomes "The priesthood said...," "The God commands you to..." gets "The priesthood commands you to...," "The God decided..." changes to "The priesthood decided...," etc. Using this little trick most of the "holly books" will automatically be deciphered and their contents will become much more clear to the determined observer.


-George

[free_electron]

Now how did we get from a discussion on flowcode to religion ?
That surely must be that darned 'evolution' !

D'oh!

( and why did i get the honor of starting it ? It started way earlier in that thread .. )

Besides, we all know the world is flat, carried by four enormous elephants standing on the back of a turtle... Go read terry pratchetts discworld books ...

And now you have to excuse me my spaghetti is ready and i can't let his noodly appendages get overcooked. May the Farce be with you...

[Mechatrommer]

Okay. So, taking God out of the equation, tell me how you think the universe created itself, out of nothing, remembering that there was NOTHING beforehand. I'm curious...

Ok then, read Lawrence Krauss's book, A Universe From Nothing.
http://www.amazon.com/Universe-Nothing-There-Something-Rather/dp/145162445X
He is one of the top physicists who are working on that very question.

obviously that was written by a man. granted a top physicist, but still a man.
another postulate (or paradox?)... let say god does exist, and He is supernatural supreme knowledge intelligent. do you think he will let us find Him while he's not intending to?
i believe He can find better place to hide than us can find him. or deceive us into making a law of "something from nothing" and believing it.
or if really he doesnt exist... then either way, we will get.... nothing!

[Mechatrommer]

What you saying, Dave?...We're just lucky the holy books don't tell them that we must sacrifice a virgin every year for good fortune.

What you saying dude? thousands of virgin get sacrificed daily my friend, in a new pleasurable way of men, not just by those idiotic people. and their blood just come to waste, sad

The same logic requires that the intelligent creator being must be created by another intelligent creator being and so infinite-um.

probably you are right. but its not been told in the holy book.

why do we need a god creator in order to be, Its more a case of man created god in his own image than god created man in his.

is that so? then why its not a harmony of law that... everything (car home computer etc) is not created, they just poof out of nothing? can we invent free energy out of neomedium magnet? or from nothing at all?

i believe the science said the creation start with.... matter+antimatter=energy, not matter+antimatter=nothing, energy is something, not nothing, just as information processing and information itself.

[MrPlacid]

What you saying dude? thousands of virgin get sacrificed daily my friend, in a new pleasurable way of men, not just by those idiotic people. and their blood just come to waste, sad

?? me no understand. What you do to virgin men again?

[firewalker]

I don;t know how/what wrote the rules of the cosmos. I know he must have been great engineer or a great TROLL.

Alexander.

[A Hellene]

[...]
obviously that was written by a man. granted a top physicist, but still a man.
another postulate (or paradox?)... let say god does exist, and He is supernatural supreme knowledge intelligent. do you think he will let us find Him while he's not intending to?
i believe He can find better place to hide than us can find him. or deceive us into making a law of "something from nothing" and believing it.
or if really he doesnt exist... then either way, we will get.... nothing!

Hide from us?
Deceive us?
Does not exit?

Really, what kind of god is this?


Well, these questions have already been answered 2,300 years ago by Epicurus (341-270 BCE), the Greek atomist philosopher* from Samos. The school he founded in Athens, "The Garden," competed with Plato's "Academy" and Aristotle's "Lyceum" and it was open even to women and slaves. Epicurus believed that knowledge and education were not exclusive privileges of the nobility and that any human being was able to be educated and to thrive in any department, in contrary to the beliefs of his times. He defined social justice as an agreement "neither to harm nor be harmed."

He is also famous for the Epicurean Paradox, where he used to say that god(s) do not interfere in human affairs because if they did everyone would be dead, since people always wish for the death of other people.
His exact words in the famous Epicurean Paradox were:
- Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
- Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
- Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
- Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

After the official establishment of Christianity by Constantine in 325 CE, Epicureanism was severely repressed, since Epicurus advocated that the greatest good in life was to seek modest pleasures in order to attain a state of tranquility (ataraxia) and freedom from fear (aphobia), as well as absence of bodily pain (aponia) through knowledge of the workings of the world and the limits of one's desires --which, as a philosophy, was the worst enemy of the Abrahamic doctrines (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) that required illiteracy and blind obedience to their fearsome and vengeful god.

But we've been there before...


-George



( * ) Epicurus was an Atomist Philosopher. Atomism is the ancient theory of Leucippus (first half of 5th century BCE), Democritus (460-370 BCE) and Epicurus (341-270 BCE), according to which the world consists of two fundamental and opposite, indivisible bodies: Atoms and Void. The Atoms are the simple, minute, indivisible, and indestructible particles that are the basic components of the entire universe. The term Atom derives from the ancient Greek adjective 'atomos,' which literally means uncuttable (from the privative prefix "a" and the verb 'temno' meaning to cut: cannot be cut, not cuttable).

[EEVblog]

Like everything else religions exist because they have the right recipe for survival. They exploit part of man's recipe for survival.

Good analogy.
They also tap into vulerability and the warm  fuzzy side of life, like the allure of life after death.

Hopefully faced with better education and communication in the modern world they will struggle and eventually go the way of the Dodo.

That's inevitable I think. The communications revolution is still in it's infancy in historical time scales, so it'll take a bit more time.
As Christopher Hitchens remarked, religion is in it's death throws.

Here in Oz, the majority of the population barely give religion lip service. It just still plays a traditional role in things like weddings and funerals.
It has had to resort to evangelical style rock music to appeal to the masses and young people these days (Hillsong, just down the road from me). The kids think it's just the best pickup joint...

Dave.

[EEVblog]

The argument goes, It takes an intelligent being like ourselves to create something like a computer therefore it must take an intelligent being to create us. The other argument is it must take an intelligent god being to create a universe out of a big bang consisting of nothing.

The same logic requires that the intelligent creator being must be created by another intelligent creator being and so infinite-um.

The obvious question one has to ask oneself is who or what created the first creating intelligent creator.

The religious people always just answer that god just is and needs no creator, but if god needs no creator in order to be the supreme intelligence why do we need a god creator in order to be, Its more a case of man created god in his own image than god created man in his.   

Carl Sagan said the same thing most eloquently:


Dave.

[EEVblog]

I remember watching a very disturbing documentary that really shocked me

Another clip that will shock you in a different way.
Beware of The God Warrior! 
Crazy Christian Lady, Marguerite Perrin on Trading Spouses.

Dave.

[A Hellene]

Oh, Dave...

I've just watched that clip and, believe me, it is NOTHING compared to Jesus Camp.

This is about a single mature individual (assuming she still has a choice or her situation is irreversible) who is broken. Jesus Camp is about the massive breaking of healthy, lovely and defenceless little children --for life...

Maybe that Christian lady was a person or the impersonation of someone who had the privilege of having that Jesus Camp or some other equivalent treatment; who knows?

I am not really familiar with the TV shows --especially with the reality shows, as a quick search revealed that the clip in question belongs to the latter ones...


-George

[djsb]

I have a view that a persons idea's about "God" are derived from their relationship with their parents. I'm still finding my way but I tend to like what Alan Watts has to say on religion etc..
Here he is on existence as a function of relationships



Not easy to understand as you have to be in a certain frame of mind to understand what he's trying to say, same as most of what he does.

David.

[AntiProtonBoy]

I skimmed over this thread, and I can assure you, debates like these always end up in tears. Just a few points I like to make...

Here are some of the most common fallacies made by religious people:

1. They treat science as a belief system, much like they do with religion. Their view is flawed. Science is nothing more than a reverse engineering manual on nature. It is a collection of information that you can use as a tool for engineering, further scientific research, or whatever. Researchers are constantly working on refining this tool. That's it.

2. Scientists are assumed to "believe" in concepts in the same way religious people do. False. Scientists either embrace the current understanding of a theory, or they don't. They don't operate on faith. Basically if something works, then a scientist has no choice but to accept. If something better comes along, scientist make no qualms about dropping the old ideas and adopt new ones.

3. The term "theory" is often mistaken as something, abstract,  fictional, without any basis of reality. Creationists often misuse the "theory" term to discredit scientific concepts. When a scientist theorises, he/she creates a model or a framework that best fits the current observations (i.e., bridging gaps in our knowledge with a foundation of known and verifiable data). This model is tested and refined until it narrows down to a solid answer. A theory is just another tool, much the same way as lab equipment is a tool for an experimental scientist.

4. Creationists always confuse the terms "something being possible" vs "something being probable". One could always entertain the possibility of God's existence, but due to the overwhelming accumulated scientific evidence, we can safely say that God's existence is highly improbable. This fact is very difficult to argue against if you are willing to look at the evidence. Unfortunately, not many people do, either due to lack of understanding, ignorance, or due to sheer pigheadedness.

Finally I'd like to say that everyone should be given the opportunity to believe whatever they want want to believe, on their own accord and in their own time. But please, do not force your beliefs unto others, and do try to exercise tolerance. Do not attempt to pass untested claims as fact, and most of all, do not attempt vandalise science with pseudo-scientific rubbish (e.g.: "intelligent design"). The emphasised part is what I find the most infuriating; and that kind of activity must be stopped at all cost.

Please, if you have the time, watch this video, but if not, cool :-)

Hahahah, Ray Comfort is one of the biggest misleading douchebags walking on the planet right now. He is making a career out of spreading utter nonsense and pseudo-scientific rubbish. How can anyone take this man seriously with when he pulls out gems out of his arse like that banana video Dave posted earlier?

[bazzatron]

Dave,
For someone who purports to be a  rabid non believer you sure do seem to have a deep knowledge of the lunatic fringe.

I being an Aussie do take umbridge with your statement that Australians are not interested in God.
Maybe the circles you move in perpetuate that way of thinking or is just convenience that motivates you?

Just to set the record about Aussies straight, i have travelled extensively in this world and the Aussie is renowned by all
and sundry as a gambler prepared to bet on anything. So it occurrs to me surely a gambling man would bet 2 bob eachway
regarding God.You are sure going to be sorry if it turns out that you have got it wrong by backing just one horse for a win mate!

All i am trying to say is each mans belief is a sacred private thing, not something to be  bandied about on chat forums.
But something to be discussed quietly and reverently with regard and humility but above all in the knowledge that we are
for all our achievements weak and feeble men.

How can we hope to progress if we close our minds and seek to close the minds of others by dogmatic opinion?
We must be prepared to listen to others but not if we are talked down to and ridiculed.
Any form of belief can be substantiated by evidence if we look hard enough for it.
The secret is to keep an open mind and not be swayed by so called public opinion.
Seek what it is  important to you and you will form opinions that will work for you but please dont force them on others
for that way lies madness.

Bazzatron 
 
Ps;- As we used to say "Peace Brothers and Sisters"

[free_electron]

[EEVblog]

Dave,
For someone who purports to be a  rabid non believer you sure do seem to have a deep knowledge of the lunatic fringe.

I have an interest in the religion debate, so I read a bit. And I find it hilarious. If I need a laugh, I can just put on a Ray Comfort video!

I being an Aussie do take umbridge with your statement that Australians are not interested in God.
Maybe the circles you move in perpetuate that way of thinking or is just convenience that motivates you?

Me personally, or Australia in general?
For the country, a lot of factors and history would come into play I'm sure. I'm not even sure if something like that has even been researched in any depth?

Just to set the record about Aussies straight, i have travelled extensively in this world and the Aussie is renowned by all
and sundry as a gambler prepared to bet on anything. So it occurrs to me surely a gambling man would bet 2 bob eachway
regarding God.You are sure going to be sorry if it turns out that you have got it wrong by backing just one horse for a win mate!

That's famously called Pascal's Wager.
You can't just make yourself believe in something when you don't, that's just, well, bullshit. And surely something a omnipotent god will see right through.

Besides, according to Australia's top Cardinal, atheists have just as much of getting into heaven:


Original here:

All i am trying to say is each mans belief is a sacred private thing, not something to be  bandied about on chat forums.
But something to be discussed quietly and reverently with regard and humility but above all in the knowledge that we are
for all our achievements weak and feeble men.

How can we hope to progress if we close our minds and seek to close the minds of others by dogmatic opinion?
We must be prepared to listen to others but not if we are talked down to and ridiculed.
Any form of belief can be substantiated by evidence if we look hard enough for it.

I keep asking to see the real evidence, but it's never forthcoming.
Of course, if there was evidence, you wouldn't need faith...

Dave.

[EEVblog]

Besides, we all know the world is flat, carried by four enormous elephants standing on the back of a turtle...

And what is the turtle standing on?
Why it's turtles all the way down!

Dave.

[MikeK]

The next great leap in human evolution will be to rid ourselves of religion, all we have to do is get over our fear of death and the unknown.

We certainly know of examples of countries banning religion, and that doesn't work out too well.  Also, there are plenty of religious people who are not afraid of death...suicide bombers sacrificing themselves for their convictions.  I think the important thing is that we continue to move towards basing decisions on evidence.

[free_electron]

Besides, we all know the world is flat, carried by four enormous elephants standing on the back of a turtle...

And what is the turtle standing on?
Why it's turtles all the way down!

Dave.

That would be the Jack Sparrow version. ( i know there's supposed to be a 'captain' in there somewhere... )

The discworld turtle swims through the universe... the scientifical name for the turtle is Chelys Galactica

[Mark]

"God loves me" is nice to hear, but what is the value or worth of such love when it is ephemeral and unable to deliver anything but nice feelings?

"Jesus Loves You" is also nice to hear, unless you are in a Mexican Prison. 

[robrenz]

Someone stating, given enough time and under the right circumstances a flight ready 747 could just come together by chance out of all of the correct base materials that exist in an industrial junk yard, would be called an idiot.  Yet stating that we (life) immensely more complex than the 747, just happened out of primordial ooze is considered scientifically sound.