Most Christians accept evolution

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

Quote

I do question this though....

For the acts of some specific people, why would one condemn an entire program.

Who's condemning an entire program?

All those bad-mouthing AA and similar programs.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

I also shop with Andrea.

Oh, you poor, poor man.



And the shortest line?
Be careful that I am not in front of you in that shortest line. Inevitably, it going to turn out the be the s l o w e s t one.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

"Hail to the Sun God, he sure is a Fun God, Ra! Ra! Ra!"

Gotta love those Egyptian cheerleaders.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I do question this though....

For the acts of some specific people, why would one condemn an entire program.

Who's condemning an entire program?

All those bad-mouthing AA and similar programs.

Can you point me to what was said that condemned the entire AA program?

[beowulf 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

I do question this though....

For the acts of some specific people, why would one condemn an entire program.

Who's condemning an entire program?

All those bad-mouthing AA and similar programs.

Can you point me to what was said that condemned the entire AA program?

Good luck

It appears to me that popsjumper must be reading something the rest of us can't see.

[deltron80 0]

It completely destroys the credibility of religion when believers cannot answer simple questions such as:

Why do you believe in your religion?

Do you care whether or not it's true?

If you ask someone why they believe in evolution, they will likely be able to answer the question.

[deltron80 0]

Quote

I am all in favor of using whatever tools work. If someone uses their favorite Leprechaun to stop sniffing glue or getting comatose on Tequila, fine.

Where I draw the line is when they then claim that correlation between results and the tool constitutes proof. "I no longer sniff glue or get comatose on tequila, therefore there are Leprechauns."

By that logic, the Pyramids are more convincing proof of the existence of Ra than laying off booze and dope is of the existence of Leprechauns or other mythical constructs.

If you say "my belief in has allowed me to ," then bully for you.

If you say " is conclusive proof of ," I call bullshit.


BSBD,

Winsor

THIS ^

[wmw999 2,147]

Religion isn't about evidence. Evolution isn't about belief. "Believing" in evolution with faith, one would then be likely to resent those interlopers who attack it by challenging precepts, or even finding out new information. I don't think that's desirable in science.

If, OTOH, one uses religion to look inward, and at relationships with other people, and at what one considers to be beyond the physical world, it's a tool. Maybe not the best tool for everyone, but an effective one for some.

They're two different systems for understanding. Religion is a far less exact system for understanding than science, but it tries to provide one means of understanding stuff that science isn't really equipped for.

They're different. If someone tries to use religious language to describe their own experience, you can say that you don't really identify with that. But, just as it's considered poor form to tell someone that their feelings are "wrong," it's poor form to tell them that a system that's working for them, and that they're NOT trying to push on you, is "wrong." That would be proselityzing. If you don't want religious people to do it to you, don't do it to them. And just as exposure to the existence of atheism doesn't violate the rights of the ardently religious, the presence of religion doesn't violate the rights of the ardently atheistic.

And before you say that science is equipped for everything, why do women like to shop for shoes so much?

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[beowulf 1]

Quote

what one considers to be beyond the physical world

Is there any such thing?

There is no reason to think there is a methaphysical or supernatural anything.

[beowulf 1]

Quote

It completely destroys the credibility of religion when believers cannot answer simple questions such as:

Why do you believe in your religion?

Do you care whether or not it's true?

If you ask someone why they believe in evolution, they will likely be able to answer the question.

They imagine all kinds of crazy things and give it important sounding words like metaphysical or supernatural to make it sound like it's something scientific. Yet not a shred of evidence exists to support their claims. And then you have insane reasoning like popsjumper that says that since by their own definition god can not be tested for, we should not ask for evidence.

I assert that if there is no evidence then there is no reason to believe and in fact it is unreasonable to believe.

[wmw999 2,147]

I don't think there's enough evidence to categorically deny that there might be worlds and/or consciousnesses that we're not aware of.

A blind man might deny color, but it exists. All I'm saying is that we might as a species just be blind in some way, and not aware of it.

If nothing else, who's to say that humans are the ones whos understanding matters? All creatures exist in their worlds; we have ours. Let's not bound it unless we're talking about bounded areas.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[winsor 187]

Quote

Quote

It completely destroys the credibility of religion when believers cannot answer simple questions such as:

Why do you believe in your religion?

Do you care whether or not it's true?

If you ask someone why they believe in evolution, they will likely be able to answer the question.

They imagine all kinds of crazy things and give it important sounding words like metaphysical or supernatural to make it sound like it's something scientific. Yet not a shred of evidence exists to support their claims. And then you have insane reasoning like popsjumper that says that since by their own definition god can not be tested for, we should not ask for evidence.

I assert that if there is no evidence then there is no reason to believe and in fact it is unreasonable to believe.

Birds are proof that with enough hand-waving you can fly!

[beowulf 1]

Quote

I don't think there's enough evidence to categorically deny that there might be worlds and/or consciousnesses that we're not aware of.

A blind man might deny color, but it exists. All I'm saying is that we might as a species just be blind in some way, and not aware of it.

If nothing else, who's to say that humans are the ones whos understanding matters? All creatures exist in their worlds; we have ours. Let's not bound it unless we're talking about bounded areas.

Wendy P.

I am not saying anything about denying the existence of anything. Before believing in something it's reasonable to ask for evidence. What evidence is there for anything supernatural or metaphysical?

[beowulf 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

It completely destroys the credibility of religion when believers cannot answer simple questions such as:

Why do you believe in your religion?

Do you care whether or not it's true?

If you ask someone why they believe in evolution, they will likely be able to answer the question.

They imagine all kinds of crazy things and give it important sounding words like metaphysical or supernatural to make it sound like it's something scientific. Yet not a shred of evidence exists to support their claims. And then you have insane reasoning like popsjumper that says that since by their own definition god can not be tested for, we should not ask for evidence.

I assert that if there is no evidence then there is no reason to believe and in fact it is unreasonable to believe.

Birds are proof that with enough hand-waving you can fly!

Just don't jump off of anything while attempting to fly.

[winsor 187]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

It completely destroys the credibility of religion when believers cannot answer simple questions such as:

Why do you believe in your religion?

Do you care whether or not it's true?

If you ask someone why they believe in evolution, they will likely be able to answer the question.

They imagine all kinds of crazy things and give it important sounding words like metaphysical or supernatural to make it sound like it's something scientific. Yet not a shred of evidence exists to support their claims. And then you have insane reasoning like popsjumper that says that since by their own definition god can not be tested for, we should not ask for evidence.

I assert that if there is no evidence then there is no reason to believe and in fact it is unreasonable to believe.

Birds are proof that with enough hand-waving you can fly!

Just don't jump off of anything while attempting to fly.

Oh, ye of little faith...

[beowulf 1]

Quote

I don't think there's enough evidence to categorically deny that there might be worlds and/or consciousnesses that we're not aware of.

You say this like there is some amount of evidence??!

Check out the JREF challange > http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge.html


They will payout 1 Million dollars to anyone that can prove anything paranormal.

[billvon 2,433]

>It completely destroys the credibility of religion when believers cannot answer simple
>questions such as:
>Why do you believe in your religion?
>Do you care whether or not it's true?

"I don't like their answers" is not the same as "they cannot answer the question."

>If you ask someone why they believe in evolution, they will likely be able to answer
>the question.

Do you care whether or not evolution is true? If so why?

[deltron80 0]

Quote

Religion isn't about evidence. Evolution isn't about belief. "Believing" in evolution with faith, one would then be likely to resent those interlopers who attack it by challenging precepts, or even finding out new information. I don't think that's desirable in science.

If, OTOH, one uses religion to look inward, and at relationships with other people, and at what one considers to be beyond the physical world, it's a tool. Maybe not the best tool for everyone, but an effective one for some.

They're two different systems for understanding. Religion is a far less exact system for understanding than science, but it tries to provide one means of understanding stuff that science isn't really equipped for.

They're different. If someone tries to use religious language to describe their own experience, you can say that you don't really identify with that. But, just as it's considered poor form to tell someone that their feelings are "wrong," it's poor form to tell them that a system that's working for them, and that they're NOT trying to push on you, is "wrong." That would be proselityzing. If you don't want religious people to do it to you, don't do it to them. And just as exposure to the existence of atheism doesn't violate the rights of the ardently religious, the presence of religion doesn't violate the rights of the ardently atheistic.

And before you say that science is equipped for everything, why do women like to shop for shoes so much?

Wendy P.

I agree with all that. The thing is, I'm not asking for evidence or any kind of proof of religion. There isn't any evidence.

I'm simply asking WHY they believe in their religion. They can't answer the question, because the only reason they actually have is that they were just raised that way. There isn't even a "spiritual" explanation for it, or any other explanation for that matter.

When you are raised in a religion you are directly taught never to question it. Most people are never asked why they believe something. That's what faith is all about.

The question, "do you care if it's true?" is also a very simple and direct question.

Christians can't answer these 2 questions, because of course to even acknowledge them with an answer is an admission of the fallibility of their beliefs.

If you actually care whether it's true or not, it requires further thought beyond, "I have faith and that's all." If you don't care whether or not it's true, then there's no sense in pretending you believe it for a reason.

I'm not trying to tell them they're wrong. I'm just asking for an explanation why. In fact, by doing this I'm welcoming them to proselytize to me.

[SkyDekker 1,143]

Quote

I'm simply asking WHY they believe in their religion. They can't answer the question, because the only reason they actually have is that they were just raised that way. There isn't even a "spiritual" explanation for it, or any other explanation for that matter.

Why are you asking questions when you have already made up your mind as to what the answer is?

I'll answer your 2 questions:

because it makes ME feel good.

I could care less if it is true.

[deltron80 0]

Quote

>It completely destroys the credibility of religion when believers cannot answer simple
>questions such as:
>Why do you believe in your religion?
>Do you care whether or not it's true?

"I don't like their answers" is not the same as "they cannot answer the question."

>If you ask someone why they believe in evolution, they will likely be able to answer
>the question.

Do you care whether or not evolution is true? If so why?

No one has answered the questions yet. Two people cited a specific event in their life as why they believe, but they didn't say what the event was. That's dodging the question.

I do care whether evolution is true, and I agree you can't "believe" in it in a spiritual sense, but I do believe/think/assert evolution is true. I believe it because I've seen scientific evidence for it. This is a poor comparison for religion. I only brought in evolution because it's an example of something demonstrable and it's in the title of the thread. If you have questions about evolution you can visit http://talkorigins.org/.

I also very much care whether religion is true. That was a contributing factor to why I'm no longer a Christian.

[deltron80 0]

Quote

Quote

I'm simply asking WHY they believe in their religion. They can't answer the question, because the only reason they actually have is that they were just raised that way. There isn't even a "spiritual" explanation for it, or any other explanation for that matter.

Why are you asking questions when you have already made up your mind as to what the answer is?

I'll answer your 2 questions:

because it makes ME feel good.

I could care less if it is true.

Yes, I've finally made up my mind, but it took quite a long time to find my way out of the intellectual wilderness of a religious upbringing.

Thank you for being the first to answer honestly.

[beowulf 1]

Quote

I agree with all that. The thing is, I'm not asking for evidence or any kind of proof of religion. There isn't any evidence.

Ah but there are those that claim there is evidence and can't believe that "personal insight" is not evidence.

[SkyDekker 1,143]

Quote

Quote

I agree with all that. The thing is, I'm not asking for evidence or any kind of proof of religion. There isn't any evidence.

Ah but there are those that claim there is evidence and can't believe that "personal insight" is not evidence.

It is evidence to them.

[beowulf 1]

In only the very loosest definition of term evidence.

[wmw999 2,147]

Quote

When you are raised in a religion you are directly taught never to question it. Most people are never asked why they believe something. That's what faith is all about.

The question, "do you care if it's true?" is also a very simple and direct question.

Well, actually, I was taught that questioning was just fine. No, no one ever asked me why I believed, or even if I believed. But one thing that my father said stuck with me -- church can be a place where you go once a week to spend some dedicated time thinking about what it means to be a good person.

There are other ways to do that. But church is also one.

Note: I haven't been going recently, so maybe that means I'm not a good person. But to me, the structure of religion opens my mind to possibilities that might not otherwise be open. The feeling that you get from sincere fellowship with others (I've both had it and not had it). Maybe it's just fellowship and connection with other people, and maybe it's with something else -- dunno.

As far as whether it's true -- well, all I can do is the best I can with this life. I've seriously considered whether I'm an atheist, and I'm not. I understand I might be wrong, I don't hold my beliefs out of fear, but they are what they are. Some of it's about the ritual; there can be power in a group sharing rituals.

Religion may or may not reflect reality. Church, on the other hand, is a social construct. It can be a force for good, or a force for self-serving.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)