So... Christianity, but more specific.

[Hurlshort]

Science doesn't have anything to do with faith? Are you serious? Does that mean science has never changed because it's always 100% accurate? Science attempts to prove stuff with experiments, but that doesn't mean it is infallible. Scientists make leaps of faith all the time.

[WITHTEETH]

Science has nothing to do with faith. Science is all about evidence. You want to advance something in science, you need to prove (or disprove) a theory. You cant just say because I said so which is what religion comes down to at the end of the day.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually we must all have faith in everything, even the smallest ideas, like 1+1=2, you must have faith for even this. for science we must have faith that the laws and theories that are here today will be here tomarrow. that is the faith in science i have.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Science doesn't have anything to do with faith?  Are you serious?  Does that mean science has never changed because it's always 100% accurate?  Science attempts to prove stuff with experiments, but that doesn't mean it is infallible.  Scientists make leaps of faith all the time.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Science never claims to be infalible either. Thats reserved for religion.

 

As methods advance, more and more questions get answered. Even if there were a divine being. I'd still see no reason to worship them since they obviously screw up just as much as people do albeit on a grander scale.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Actually we must all have faith in everything, even the smallest ideas, like 1+1=2, you must have faith for even this. for science we must have faith that the laws and theories that are here today will be here tomarrow. that is the faith in science i have.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I wouldnt classify that as faith any more than I would classify laws as faith.

[SteveThaiBinh]

We had a lengthy discussion about all of this a while ago. Personally I don't like to use the word 'faith' with science, because 'faith' implies belief without the need for evidence, whereas 'belief' is a more neutral term which includes the possibility that what you believe is supported by evidence. The evidence may not be complete, but it is there, and its presence is something that is important to atheists. This explains why many atheists react negatively to the suggestion that their belief system is a faith.

[WITHTEETH]

Actually we must all have faith in everything, even the smallest ideas, like 1+1=2, you must have faith for even this. for science we must have faith that the laws and theories that are here today will be here tomarrow. that is the faith in science i have.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I wouldnt classify that as faith any more than I would classify laws as faith.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thats because you are fastened in your belief that you are correct. And you are correct because you say so(im not being sarcastic). But still that doesn't mean you are correct to the person standing next to you. this is understanding in my point of view.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Thats because you are fastened in your belief that you are correct. And you are correct because you say so(im not being sarcastic). But still that doesn't mean you are correct to the person standing next to you. this is understanding in my point of view.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Not really I waver between aetheist and agnostic so I dont really fit your description at all.

 

There may be evidence for some sort of divine being, but an all powerful all knowing one ? Dont see much evidence for that do you ?

[WITHTEETH]

We had a lengthy discussion about all of this a while ago.  Personally I don't like to use the word 'faith' with science, because 'faith' implies belief without the need for evidence, whereas 'belief' is a more neutral term which includes the possibility that what you believe is supported by evidence.  The evidence may not be complete, but it is there, and its presence is something that is important to atheists.  This explains why many atheists react negatively to the suggestion that their belief system is a faith.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

But if we go far back enough, we are taking a leap of faith somewhere. so it is faith. I don't like the word either myself, i agree with you SteveThaiBinh. But I don't want to raise myself above another and tell them their beleifs are wrong because i say so. Thus if i said i didn't like the word faith and science being used together, it would be my own fault for allowing myself to get agitetated at the idea of someone using them together. Make sense?

[WITHTEETH]

Thats because you are fastened in your belief that you are correct. And you are correct because you say so(im not being sarcastic). But still that doesn't mean you are correct to the person standing next to you. this is understanding in my point of view.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Not really I waver between aetheist and agnostic so I dont really fit your description at all.

 

There may be evidence for some sort of divine being, but an all powerful all knowing one ? Dont see much evidence for that do you ?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I personally don't see any evidence for anything divine. then again there is no evidence to disprove it so i see your dilemma.

[SteveThaiBinh]

But if we go far back enough, we are taking a leap of faith somewhere. so it is faith. I don't like the word either myself, i agree with you SteveThaiBinh. But I don't want to raise myself above another and tell them their beleifs are wrong because i say so. Thus if i said i didn't like the word faith and science being used together, it would be my own fault  for allowing myself to get agitetated at the idea of someone using them together.  Make sense?

It does. It never serves to take offense in this kind of discussion, because most people involved are usually struggling to understand points of view that are very alien to them. A Christian who suggests that atheism is also a faith may sincerely be trying to find points in common in order to further mutual understanding. However, to many atheists, referring to the belief as a faith is undermining a key part of the belief system, which is that evidence underlies what they believe. I don't really think that I'm taking a leap of faith in holding an atheistic belief, though that's an interesting discussion, too. Discussion of language are unavoidable in this kind of debate.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

I personally don't see any evidence for anything divine. then again there is no evidence to disprove it so i see your dilemma.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Can't really say I see it as dilemma.

[WITHTEETH]

It does.  It never serves to take offense in this kind of discussion, because most people involved are usually struggling to understand points of view that are very alien to them.  A Christian who suggests that atheism is also a faith may sincerely be trying to find points in common in order to further mutual understanding.  However, to many atheists, referring to the belief as a faith is undermining a key part of the belief system, which is that evidence underlies what they believe.  I don't really think that I'm taking a leap of faith in holding an atheistic belief, though that's an interesting discussion, too.  Discussion of language are unavoidable in this kind of debate.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

(+) theism: The belief in a god

(-)Atheism: The Disbelief

(_)Agnosticism: Neutral

 

The only one that isn't taking the leap of faith is the agnostic - ShadowpaladinV1.0 hes not using faith because he states he doesn't know. Hes nuetral. nothing wrong with indecision, steve you said it yourself if remember correctly that its underated. :D Whats wrong with saying I dont know?! nothing, its great!

Edited October 19, 2005 by WITHTEETH

[Hurlshort]

I also think that the reason many scientist don't believe in a higher power has little to do with experiments they have done. All people enter into a situation with pre-concieved notions. Many people who pursue science already have a disdain for religion.

 

Darwin is a perfect example. He was raised Catholic and rebelled at an early age. He hated the church. I'm not an expert on him at all, but that does influence a person.

 

Religion is also not infallible. Again, religion is a construct of man.

[WITHTEETH]

Darwin is a perfect example.  He was raised Catholic and rebelled at an early age.  He hated the church.  I'm not an expert on him at all, but that does influence a person.

Religion is also not infallible.  Again, religion is a construct of man.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Darwin was was agnostic btw.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Atheists are always complaining about how religion is always pushed in their face... but I find more atheists push their beliefs in my face... sure I believe in God but I'd never try and convince someone who thought otherwise... we're all entitled to believe what we want

 

DL

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I think you will find a reason for that when your on the verge of some big discovery and you get people saying you cant play god, its likely to annoy you.

 

After all unless you actually talk to god , all you really have to go on is a 2000 year old book which is not only extremely out of date for a realistic world view, but also far from infalliable given it's copying by various people and into various languages.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Religion is also not infallible.  Again, religion is a construct of man.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

True , then why should you believe that anyone is actually speaking for god ? If they are not, well then religion is a big hoax isnt it.

[kirottu]

Aethism is a religion in itself. It is the belief that there is no higher power and that life was created spontaneously. This has been proved btw to be at nearly impossible odds(Im talking .00000001% chance).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

150 000 000 000 galaxies and each one has about same amount of stars. So even if it

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

150 000 000 000 galaxies and each one has about same amount of stars. So even if it

[SteveThaiBinh]

(+) theism: The belief in a god

(-)Atheism: The Disbelief

(_)Agnosticism: Neutral

Arguably, atheists and agnostics are one and the same, or at least very close. I know that in common usage, they appear to be different, with atheists confident that there is no God, and agnostics unsure of whether there is a God or not. But if you dig a little deeper, there's not much difference between the two positions. Few atheists would say 'It is impossible that God created the world'. Instead, they would say 'There is no evidence that God created the world, and ample evidence that the world came into existence by other means, therefore I believe that God did not create the world.' This is not an outright denial, so technically those atheists could also be called agnostics. Agnosticism is not a middle way between atheism and theism, because the agnostic usually doubts and wants evidence. It is usually therefore closer to atheism, though an self-proclaimed agnostic might disagree. In any case, the agnostic inherently shares the scepticism of the atheist rather than the faith of the theist.

[Hurlshort]

Well, there are very few Atheistic Crusades in History. That's a good thing.

 

I didn't know Darwin was agnostic, as I'm far from an expert on him or any scientist.

 

I also don't understand why people always bring up the problems with organized religion. We've been discussing whether or not God exists. The Bible, Qur'an, and Tora are not necessary to support a belief in a higher power. I've already stated that my belief comes from simply looking around. I do not see how this is random.

[WITHTEETH]

(+) theism: The belief in a god

(-)Atheism: The Disbelief

(_)Agnosticism: Neutral

Arguably, atheists and agnostics are one and the same, or at least very close. I know that in common usage, they appear to be different, with atheists confident that there is no God, and agnostics unsure of whether there is a God or not. But if you dig a little deeper, there's not much difference between the two positions. Few atheists would say 'It is impossible that God created the world'. Instead, they would say 'There is no evidence that God created the world, and ample evidence that the world came into existence by other means, therefore I believe that God did not create the world.' This is not an outright denial, so technically those atheists could also be called agnostics. Agnosticism is not a middle way between atheism and theism, because the agnostic usually doubts and wants evidence. It is usually therefore closer to atheism, though an self-proclaimed agnostic might disagree. In any case, the agnostic inherently shares the scepticism of the atheist rather than the faith of the theist.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yup, The common division in atheism is between weak atheism and strong atheism. Strong atheism is the position that God does not exist, and that the existence of God is itself impossible. A weak atheist is someone who does not have a belief in God, but that the idea of God is not necessarily logically impossible (though particular definitions of God, such as the Christian God, is can be considered to be logically impossible). The distinction lies in that the Strong atheist is making a claim about existence, while the weak atheist is making a claim about knowledge.

 

As for myself, I'm a weak atheist (I don't have a belief in god, but recognize that certain definitions of God are logically possible).

 

Lines can begin to blur.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

I also don't understand why people always bring up the problems with organized religion.  We've been discussing whether or not God exists.  The Bible, Qur'an, and Tora are not necessary to support a belief in a higher power.  I've already stated that my belief comes from simply looking around.  I do not see how this is random.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Because without a god those religions cease to have power. Which would probably be a good thing all around.

 

What is it exactly that you see by looking around that leads you to that conclusion ?

 

For me it's a measure of time. Anything can occur given enough time and having made enough mistakes and learned from them (which is evolution in action on a basic level).

 

If you subscribe to the biblical story for aging the earth, then yep when you look around it boarders on miraculous. However when you factor in the actual age, the number of false starts and the chain of events its just a series of chance which must inevitably come true given enough time.

[Hurlshort]

Religion and humanity have gone hand in hand since prehistory. Stating that the world would be better off without religion seems terribly arrogant to me. I've already stated my problems with organized religion, but I think a belief in something greater has been crucial for mankind.

 

Because without a god those religions cease to have power.

 

But without religion, does God cease to exist? When I tell you I see evidence of something greater all around me, it is difficult to put into words. It's like describing love, or the pride I feel when I do something positive. It's not tangible, but I just don't see how everything around me came about randomly. I'm not saying there is an ultimate plan, but there does seem to be a point to all this. I'm pretty sure it's 42.

[WITHTEETH]

Hurlshot, your right relgion does have a point, it sves the religious. Science saves scientists, philosophy saves the philosopher, and careers saves the careerists.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Religion and humanity have gone hand in hand since prehistory.  Stating that the world would be better off without religion seems terribly arrogant to me.  I've already stated my problems with organized religion, but I think a belief in something greater has been crucial for mankind.   

 

But without religion, does God cease to exist?  When I tell you I see evidence of something greater all around me, it is difficult to put into words.  It's like describing love, or the pride I feel when I do something positive.  It's not tangible, but I just don't see how everything around me came about randomly.  I'm not saying there is an ultimate plan, but there does seem to be a point to all this.  I'm pretty sure it's 42.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Maybe it does, but everything needs to grow up and part of growing up is letting go of the blanky.

 

Without religion it becomes a moot point since whether or not god exists no longer matters.

 

The only point is the one create for yourself