Religion Schmereligion.

[pajarito 0]

Quote

There was no "before" the big bang.
The human mind has a hard time coping with infinity.

I think Stephen Hawking is better at it than most and he doesn't appear to accept what you stated above.

Quote

The fact that gravity is always attractive implies that the universe must be either expanding or contracting. According to the general theory of relativity, there must have been a state of infinite density in the past, the big bang, which would have been an effective beginning of time. Similarly, if the whole universe recollapsed, there must be another state of infinite density in the future, the big crunch, which would be an end of time. Even if the whole universe did not recollapse, there would be singularities in any localized regions that collapsed to form black holes. These singularities would be an end of time for anyone who fell inito the black hole. At the big bang and other singularities, all the laws would have broken down, so God would still have had complete freedom to choose what happened and how the universe began.

Stephen Hawking: A Brief History of Time

[Darius11 12]

But it wasnt science itself that first convinced you there was a god, Its just reinforcing your religious views right?

Quote

Yes
I think like most other people I was introduced to God and my parent’s beliefs (they are not overly religious) before I was introduced to science and math. Most of us don’t learn about science until we are older and in school.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

• Quote

[Zenister 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

cavemen had religion?

once again proving you need to do ALOT more research on the subject of Religion....

Zen...
You're such an intellectual giant.
Your enlightenment brightens the sky for all of us.
I'm in awe of your complete understanding of everything while the rest of us continue to crawl around in darkness.

the difference between you and i is, i still SEEK to understand everything.. where as you believe your religion has given you all the answers you will ever need

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[MooChooser 0]

Quote

Quote

There was no "before" the big bang.
The human mind has a hard time coping with infinity.

I think Stephen Hawking is better at it than most and he doesn't appear to accept what you stated above.

Quote

The fact that gravity is always attractive implies that the universe must be either expanding or contracting. According to the general theory of relativity, there must have been a state of infinite density in the past, the big bang, which would have been an effective beginning of time. Similarly, if the whole universe recollapsed, there must be another state of infinite density in the future, the big crunch, which would be an end of time. Even if the whole universe did not recollapse, there would be singularities in any localized regions that collapsed to form black holes. These singularities would be an end of time for anyone who fell inito the black hole. At the big bang and other singularities, all the laws would have broken down, so God would still have had complete freedom to choose what happened and how the universe began.

Stephen Hawking: A Brief History of Time

Seems to me you just quoted a passage that supports my statement.

[pajarito 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

There was no "before" the big bang.
The human mind has a hard time coping with infinity.

I think Stephen Hawking is better at it than most and he doesn't appear to accept what you stated above.

Quote

The fact that gravity is always attractive implies that the universe must be either expanding or contracting. According to the general theory of relativity, there must have been a state of infinite density in the past, the big bang, which would have been an effective beginning of time. Similarly, if the whole universe recollapsed, there must be another state of infinite density in the future, the big crunch, which would be an end of time. Even if the whole universe did not recollapse, there would be singularities in any localized regions that collapsed to form black holes. These singularities would be an end of time for anyone who fell inito the black hole. At the big bang and other singularities, all the laws would have broken down, so God would still have had complete freedom to choose what happened and how the universe began.

Stephen Hawking: A Brief History of Time

Seems to me you just quoted a passage that supports my statement.

Maybe so. I see your point.

However, does it really seem logical to you that the matter and energy which makes up this entire universe always existed. Where did it come from? There had to be a beginning somewhere/somehow. Even if our laws of physics breaks down and we can't comprehend it. What set it in motion? Do you really just buy into the idea that it was always just there and that it started itself? And if it wasn't always there and something did set it in motion, there had to be some sort of existence beforehand.

[pajarito 0]

Quote

the difference between you and i is, i still SEEK to understand everything.. where as you believe your religion has given you all the answers you will ever need

If you're referring only to religion, what people believe and why they believe it is a very interesting topic to me. I do, however, believe and am convinced that Christianity has all the answers that I will ever need. If you're referring to our search for scientific truths, I am very interested in that also. I just approach that from a different angle than some here. I believe advancement in science can only solidify a belief in God.

[philh 0]

"However, does it really seem logical to you that the matter and energy which makes up this entire universe always existed. Where did it come from? "
Well we can explain quite far back. all the way to the big bang. perhaps there was a before the big bang. String theory has some interesting suggestions, although they are not proven. But really we should focus on what we know and we can measure. Anything else is unsubstantiated, so it is with god.

' There had to be a beginning somewhere/somehow. " Really how do you know this? Not everyhting has a begining, circles dont.

[SudsyFist 0]

Quote

There had to be a beginning somewhere/somehow.

Why? I mean, really, why?

Have you read much on quantum theory? The sort of stuff that goes on at the subatomic level might blow your mind: it defies everything we consider logical by our measly ten-fingered minds.

I'm totally comfortable saying we don't know whether there was a beginning (as we understand the term). And I'm glad there are some pretty smart people actively and objectively pursuing an answer to that very question.

[pajarito 0]

' There had to be a beginning somewhere/somehow. "

Quote

Really how do you know this? Not everyhting has a begining, circles dont.

Right, but why is the circle there in the first place (even if only in your mind). How did this concept of circle come into existence. What set the law in motion?

[pajarito 0]

Quote

Quote

There had to be a beginning somewhere/somehow.

Why? I mean, really, why?

Have you read much on quantum theory? The sort of stuff that goes on at the subatomic level might blow your mind: it defies everything we consider logical by our measly ten-fingered minds.

I'm totally comfortable saying we don't know whether there was a beginning (as we understand the term). And I'm glad there are some pretty smart people actively and objectively pursuing an answer to that very question.

And you choose to believe that it just "all happened" and that was that. That's ok with me. I believe differently. It's still interesting to discuss. I just think that your approach has a lot of "faith" involved also. You may not want to admit that, though.

[SudsyFist 0]

Quote

And you choose to believe that it just "all happened" and that was that.

Dude, I just said, "I'm totally comfortable saying we don't know whether there was a beginning."

WTF?

[philh 0]

"Right, but why is the circle there in the first place (even if only in your mind). How did this concept of circle come into existence. What set the law in motion? "
quite frankly we dont know why the laws of physics are there. but why should we conclude anything from our ignorance?

[kallend 1,672]

Quote

"Right, but why is the circle there in the first place (even if only in your mind). How did this concept of circle come into existence. What set the law in motion? "
quite frankly we dont know why the laws of physics are there. but why should we conclude anything from our ignorance?

I conclude that physicists should be paid more.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Zenister 0]

Quote

And you choose to believe that it just "all happened" and that was that. That's ok with me. I believe differently. It's still interesting to discuss. I just think that your approach has a lot of "faith" involved also. You may not want to admit that, though.

not at all.. there are first causes for Everything.. but saying "God did it." isnt an answer, it is a belief and one that has ZERO evidence to support it.

my approach requires no faith at all. Merely observation, analysis and an open mind

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[micro 0]

Quote

Micro, you're obviously a religious man.
Were your parents religious or did you choose it for yourself?
Either way, what is it that keeps you religious?
This is really the question I was asking.

It seems that as time goes on religion evolves to fit better into the world around it. Does this mean that they were wrong in the beginning or that religion is a non specific idea open to individual interpretation? If so, then why stick so vehemently to ones ideas?

Quote

If you want to understand why people are religious. i would reccomend reading about memes. They behave like genes but are human ideas. They reproduce themselves like genes. Religion is a very effective meme, in most cases its most important message is follow us or die either an actual death(eg Judaism) or an eternal death(eg christianity). it uses the balckmail of hell and the bribery of heaven to get itself reproduced and the beauty of it all is that you cant find out the goods are all bogus until you die. Ingenious.Notice that almost everyone in the world follows the religion they were born with. That should give you a clue as to the nature of religious belief.

What do the religious ones among us think about this theory?

hi, i'll gladly answer any question you have, as long as it's asked in the manner you are asking... i appreciate your sincerity and your non-judgemental questions. it is a fresh, welcome change to the typical vitriol expressed towards people of religion here (and, all too often, returned in kind, by assholes like myself)

my mother was religious, or at least attempted to be in the midst of a chaotic environment. her mother was a convert to catholicism but believed a wacky mix of orthodox catholicism and occult/astrology. my father had and continues to have no religion. he was forced to attend church by his adopted parents who would drop him off then split. not the best example.

so, it suffices to say that i grew up in a household w/ very conflicting influences, religiously. my mother forced me to go to mass yet my father remained at home in his boxers, watching tv... and my mother's forced attendance policy was rather heavy handed.

my own "coming to" regarding being a "person w/ religion" was a conscious decision in my late teens. I was addicted to drugs and alcohol and experienced what I consider to be a direct, divine intervention/healing. While I still drink on occasion, it is rarely to excess (recent excursion to skymonkeyONE and katiebear excluded), and I have not had any desire to abuse drugs in almost 20 years. I never went to treatment, I never attended AA. It just "happened." After this "divine intervention," I begain to question my particular religious faith and asked questions about why am I catholic instead of protestant, non-christian, etc. I studied comparitive religions, yet i remained vexed by the outlandish claims of catholicism. I travelled to gallup, new mexico to meet mother theresa and spend time w/ her and her missionaries in '88 and became further convinced that catholicism was right. later I traveled to rome and met cardinal ratzinger and the next year, Pope JPII. this just solidified my faith further.

I'm digressing a little... my parents faith, at this juncture in my life, has very little to do w/ my persisting in the faith. Over the years, my mother's faith has waxed and wained, my father's has remained dead. Mine has remained, mostly intact, since 1986. No one else in my family of origin is religious. In fact, most of them are rather antagonistic to it.

as to the theory of memes, i haven't really given it much thought except that a lot of my friends are converts to catholicism. my youngest child's godfather was an atheist. my oldest child's godmother was protestant. two other friends were baptist. two priest friends of mine in nashville were episcopalian (sp?). where I went to college, there are almost as many catholic converts as there are cradle catholics. so, in my little world, the theory doesn't fit very neatly, at least for people who actively question why their particular religion professes what it believes.

so there's my story... thanks again for asking, sorry this is long and rambling... just in from a flight and i'm loopy...

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[micro 0]

Quote

"However, does it really seem logical to you that the matter and energy which makes up this entire universe always existed. Where did it come from? "
Well we can explain quite far back. all the way to the big bang. perhaps there was a before the big bang. String theory has some interesting suggestions, although they are not proven. But really we should focus on what we know and we can measure. Anything else is unsubstantiated, so it is with god.

We certainly don't know how life began on Earth, do we? Yet it is propagated by Neo-Darwinists as "fact" that life on Earth began naturally, w/o any divine or creator intervention, even more vehemently than some door-to-door bible thumpers! Believing in THAT, that life sprang up on earth naturally takes an even bigger leap of faith than believing in a creator.

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[micro 0]

Quote

Quote

"Right, but why is the circle there in the first place (even if only in your mind). How did this concept of circle come into existence. What set the law in motion? "
quite frankly we dont know why the laws of physics are there. but why should we conclude anything from our ignorance?

I conclude that physicists should be paid more.

here here! after all, you gotta gas up that mooney!

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[AlexCrowley 0]

i just pooped a hammer.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[micro 0]

Quote

i just pooped a hammer.

claw or ball-pein?

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[billvon 2,463]

>How did this concept of circle come into existence.

There is no absolute 'concept' of a circle. Things exist; we apply concepts to them. Things like circles, the speed of light, pi, planets and stars happen because the universe allows them to, not because a concept exists.

[JackC 0]

Quote

We certainly don't know how life began on Earth, do we? Yet it is propagated by Neo-Darwinists as "fact" that life on Earth began naturally, w/o any divine or creator intervention, even more vehemently than some door-to-door bible thumpers! Believing in THAT, that life sprang up on earth naturally takes an even bigger leap of faith than believing in a creator.

This I don't get. There are a number of scientific theories that do quite well at explaining how the universe and life began and developed. If you don't understand them, you may think that believing in them takes a great leap of faith. However, for each scientific theory out there you can go back to first principles, look at the evidence, work it through and (presumably) come up with the same conclusion. You can see exactly how and why scientist believe what they do.

Yet because people cannot comprehend how something (the universe) could either a) start from nothing or b) exist forever; they postulate an entity (a creator) which either a) started from nothing or b) existed forever; and somehow think this actually answers some kind of question. I cannot for the life of me understand how this makes sense to anyone. I really can't.

[philh 0]

"We certainly don't know how life began on Earth, do we? Yet it is propagated by Neo-Darwinists as "fact" that life on Earth began naturally, w/o any divine or creator intervention, even more vehemently than some door-to-door bible thumpers! Believing in THAT, that life sprang up on earth naturally takes an even bigger leap of faith than believing in a creator. "
-------------------
Wrong Wrong Wrong. Neo Darwinists , at leasat in their role as neo darwinsts do not claim "as"fact" anything about how life on earth began. Evolution via natural selection is about the origin of species not about the origin of life. The origin of life falls under the study subject of abio genesis. This is a seperate subject form evolution. Some evolutionsist believe life first originated naturally some believe in divine creation either is consistent with a Darwinian aproach.
Ther are several competing theories for abio genesis, some with better evidence than others. For example , one scenario details the interaction of a crudely self replicatting genetic molecule and a crudely surface bound metabolic coating . The genetic molecule might have exploited the chemical energy of the repliucation process and the ability of the metaboloid to protect itself by binding to its surface.Currently experiments are being conducted to investigate how RNA and simple metabolic cycle create simple pathways which will help verify the likelihood of this scenario. It will not be done on a leap of faith. This and other abio genesis thoeries will be tested that is how naturalistic explanations ie science works. To contrast with religion where the added assumption of super naturalistic agent is introduceed without a shred of evidece.
What we know from physcis is the solar system originated naturlly, what we know from biologiy is that species originated naturlly, what we know form geology is that mountains originated naturlly. To suppose life originated naturally is less therefore less of an unwarranted assumption than to introduce any unproves super natural agent.


As to the theory of memes, it is supported by the fact that by far the majority of Christians were brought up by Christian parents, the same for jews,Muslims etc. occasional anecdotes of excpetions hardly outweight the mass of evidence of billions of people.

[RMURRAY 1]

Quote

So, how can so many people still be religious in this day and age?

I can understand why cave men/women might need religion to explain the mysteries of the world, but now we have science and more developed brains for that.

As far as I can tell there is absolutely no reason to "believe".

I'm open minded and won't dismiss anything without consideration, but it seems religion is just an advanced form of denial.

For those of you who are religious, what is it that makes you so sure that all of those hours in church are not spent in vain?

I tend tp agree with you. Made me think of classic monty python lines.....


Brian: I'm not the Messiah! Will you please listen? I am not the Messiah, do you understand? Honestly!
Girl: Only the true Messiah denies His divinity.
Brian: What? Well, what sort of chance does that give me? All right! I am the Messiah!
Followers: He is! He is the Messiah!
Brian: Now, fuck off!
[silence]
Arthur: How shall we fuck off, O Lord?

[ROK 0]

Out of every Religious thread I've read in SC, one thing is pretty apparent...we can't prove, or disprove the existence of God.

The "intellectuals" proselytize their science god, and we Christians proselytize our God (our God is capitalized though)! I know that it's not all of our intention to do so, but by debating to prove your point to others....you're proselytizing.

If you look at the "evolutionary" timeline for humans, you'd have to be whacked to think that we know it all. It wasn't very long ago that we thought the world to be flat "there be monsters", and that the Earth was the center of the universe.

We are not intelligent enough to prove, or disprove God. Enter Faith....a firm belief without logical proof.

I was not raised with God, but I've always known that God existed. I don't know why, no event changed me, and no one sat down and convinced me either. It's a given for me just like I know when I take my socks off, I'll see my toes.

I don't believe in God because of a fear of what will happen when I die either. If I had that fear, I probably wouldn't be quite so crazy in my day to day activities. God is as real a part of my life as the sun being there every day when I open my eyes. God is part of my REALITY and my belief could no more be removed than many of your beliefs that there is no room in science for a god.

I find it fasinating and believe that some people are born knowing without a doulbt that God exists, and some people are born never being able to believe in anything that they can't look at under a microscope.

We can debate forever, and no side will win.

Here's a question....Has anyone on here converted to Atheism, or Christianity because of what they've read in the SC threads??? A little chum for the waters...