Debate: Religion

It's time to dabate!

The topic, in case you couldn't tell from the title, is religion. This includes all possible aspects, including origins of the universe, evolution, the bible, koran, whatever you feel like bringing up, as long as it pertains to religion.

Please keep this a mature discussion.

Absolutely no memes.

A toast goes to Logos385 for the idea!

EDIT: I thought this would have been obvious, but this being a debate, please don't upvote anyone else's post

You might be interested


  • 2

    Go ahead, say your views, rail against it, profess your love for it, etc. Be at least mildly civil, and be ready to back up your claims.

    Also we have notifications, so this will be SO much easier!

    PS. I will stay out of this one for two entire days. I'll let the argument(s) formulate, statements develop, etc., before I start my ridiculously bias discourse : ).

    Have fun, team!

    I see arguments over religion on this site all of the time, and it looks to me like the majority of you are atheist. I was wondering what variations there are between us.

    I was Christened Roman catholic but now choose to be known as atheist, personally I am not prejudice toward people who are religious, I just don't see sense in it.

    beating a dead horse horse demotivational poster 1267844749

    Do you have any links that aren't several years old?
    - TheRussianBadger January 18, 2013, 12:07 pm
    I am not telling you to stop in any way shape or form. Just saying this topic has been brought up.
    - johnecash January 18, 2013, 12:19 pm
    Thanks for the clarification, but if your not going to post about the topic in question, then please don't post here.
    - TheRussianBadger January 18, 2013, 12:22 pm
    I agree. And I did post about the topic.
    - johnecash January 18, 2013, 1:50 pm
    Don't take Johnecash too seriously. He'll say you're beating a dead horse, then make 3-4 posts about gun control in the same week. Who's beating what now? XD
    - CrazyJay January 29, 2013, 5:27 pm
    there ya go, if this was what that whole thing was about then please just ask next time? it'd make my life a hell of a lot easier. i apologized before for the mistake made once already and explained that it wasn't clear that you were quoting the links. i'm a fair enough guy, if you had actually just asked for me to remove it then i would have, as i hadn't meant to insult you. just made a statement based off a misinterpretation of your post. I'm more than a fair mod, so next time just ask politely and we can move on with our lives.
    - 24paperwings February 8, 2013, 12:18 pm
    Yet the mistake of banning my other name is still in effect. I do t assign blame. I will not say that one of us acted more right or wrong than the other. I will only say you and I want to go on and get past it but without my other name, you make it very difficult. So if you want to truly move on, get my name back. Restore order to the force.
    - NotJohnEcash February 8, 2013, 6:53 pm
    Lol. Honestly 'NotJohnEcash', I'd say the chances of you of all people getting your account back is pretty damn close to zero. It's been a long time coming.
    - Ertrov February 9, 2013, 9:09 pm
    Yep, just gives me less reason to follow the rules. Forgiveness and understanding are not a trait this site values. Nor is equality. Funny thing about backing some one into a corner. You can ban my name but not me from posting. War and hate never helps anyone but it appears that's what some want. Not peace.
    - NotJohnEcash February 9, 2013, 9:36 pm
    So basically you're saying you intend not to follow the rules, am I getting that right? Because I'm sure the site creators actually can ban your IP address, so I'll make sure to keep an eye out for these planned breaches of the TOS you've apparently come up with.
    - Ertrov February 9, 2013, 10:57 pm
    In his defense, I believe I have participated in at least 3 "religion" debates on Sharenator.
    - Jofus1992 February 9, 2013, 11:46 pm
    My ip has been banned, yet here I am. I won't be home for a white yet, so tell me, how can you ban my ip when I am not always in the same town, state, country or even side of the world. Basically your creators tried to ban me, gave it their all and yet here I am. There is nothing more that can be done to me. Y'all shot your wad and it was pathetically not enough. So the question remains should I treat the site as its creators have treated me. If I follow the rules or not depends on the name I will post under. JohnEcas will follow the rules is the only promise I make. Not johnecash and my other names make no such promise. So I leave the all in the creators court, give me a reason to follow the rules by restoring my name, or give me no reason to follow the rules. As Captain Planet would say, "the power is yours."
    - NotJohnEcash February 10, 2013, 12:07 am
    You're correct that the power belongs to the mods in that, if you do break the rules with whatever account, that account will be banned. I'm not saying this to show off power or some stupid shit, I'm just letting you know that if you intend to be an asshat and disobey the rules of the site, it won't be tolerated. You can always make new accounts, but they can always be banned too.
    - Ertrov February 10, 2013, 12:37 am
    You may be new to the site so let me get you up to speed. You can make as many accounts as you want, I don't care about this account. Ban it, I'll make a new one. As I said, there is nothing more to me than can be done. On the other hand there is plenty I can do to this site and there is nothing to stop me.
    - NotJohnEcash February 10, 2013, 12:49 am
    A fair mod who does not reply to a direct post. The inequality continues, my reasons for wanting to follow the rules, well that shrinks every day.
    - NotJohnEcash February 10, 2013, 12:51 am
    ORLLY? I would think deleting whatever eventual breach of the rules you commit and then banning the account is a pretty effective way to stop you. You break the rules, it gets deleted. You do it again, it gets deleted again. That's how it works. There's nothing you can do to mess up the site that can't be easily undone.
    - Ertrov February 10, 2013, 1:02 am
    Sounds like a fun, if not easy, challenge to me. Now go bugger off, I have to help install the water purification system that just arrived here in a small village out side of KL Malaysia.
    - NotJohnEcash February 10, 2013, 1:10 am
    I just have to wonder why you waste your time harassing people online when you clearly care about people in the real world. Kind of a contradiction there, JC.
    - Ertrov February 10, 2013, 1:32 am
    I never bother anyone who has not bothered me first. Say something stupid, get a stupid response. In short I treat others as they treat me.
    - NotJohnEcash February 10, 2013, 11:07 pm
    you really don't know when to quit do you? johne drop it, you're not helping yourself here.
    - 24paperwings February 11, 2013, 3:23 pm
    Just think if you would had answered the first post i gave you, we might not be here
    Wow, according to the tos you should not speak to other members in such a way.

    Offensive posts
    Debates are ok, but rude, insulting, attacking, hateful, profane, threatening comments are not allowed. Be polite! Any offensive posts will be deleted.

    Telling some one to get a life is offensive and not how a moderator should set the example. Please don't loose your cool...again.
    Please be respectful when speaking to other members. As a moderator you should be an example of respect. Sadly this is not the first time you have used vulgarity and/or insulted me. Just as you don't like people bringing up your drinking problem, I don't like people telling me to get a life. But hey being fair is not what you strive to do. Be a leader is not what you strive for.
    You did delete my other account, I made a new one. Delete this one, ill make a new one. Ban my ip, well lets just say at this point in my life I am jetting all over Asia. So to ban me, you need to ban Asia.
    Funny you bring up having a life. Sounds like you are trying to convince yourself. My day was spent helping install water purification systems in Malaysia. The polio vaccinations get here in the morning.
    So I find it funny you tell me to get a life. Tell me what have you done with yours? Beside insult me while pitching a hissy fit when I do the same to you?
    - NotJohnEcash February 12, 2013, 10:22 am
    1.) i'm in college i don't give a fuck if people know i drink.
    2.) who keeps bringing this up time and time again? grow up and move on
    3.) enough is enough, this convo is over you have my reasons. good bye.
    - 24paperwings February 12, 2013, 10:36 am
    What now you don't care if people know about your drinking??? Are you not the same person who had a temper tantrum last time the issue was raised? Please try and be consistent. You may be intoxicated at the moment and don't recall what you told me so here let me copy and past your words

    i can and will delete any and all comments of you referring to my state of mind, should you ever make a claim about my state of sobriety without me saying what state i was in.

    So which rule do you want me to go by? You don't care about your drinking due to you being in college or you do care?
    - NotJohnEcash February 12, 2013, 10:41 am
    1.) just because i dont care if people know i drink doesn't mean you can make comments on my state of sobriety.
    2.) yes thats exactly what i will do, you sir have no right and imply it in a degrading way. therefore it is hateful and i will delete it.
    3.) i follow the TOS as should you. if it's implied hatefully and disrespectfully then it is subject to deletion, if it is interpreted it as hateful or disrespectful by a mod its subject to deletion. if you continue such behavior a ban can and will be implemented. I followed the TOS and now i'm requesting you do as well just as i did the last time. please follow the TOS.
    - 24paperwings February 12, 2013, 11:08 am
    So how is telling people to "fuck off johne" (your words not mine) not a breach of the tos?
    Of calling some one a troll?
    " you are nothing but a troll who cares nothing about respect. "
    Or how about telling some one "to get a life."(offensive)

    Well you asked that I rdont eference your state of mind but made it clear you don't mind people know you drin. so i wont call you a drunk per your request. along with the fact that you have admitted in the past to posting while drinking, it makes more sense to me that if you are drinking now, something you said is ok for others to know, that you not see the text book breaking of the tos you have committed(please see the short list of examples above) so what I truly don't get is why may you be offensive, you know telling people to get a life, telling people to fuck off, calling prople trolls, but others can not? There are two golden rules in life. We may only follow one. So is your golden rule do in to others as you want them to do to you? Or is it he who has the gold makes the rules? Your move.
    - NotJohnEcash February 12, 2013, 11:33 am
    .... you really don't understand why you were banned do you? it was because you kept attacking members despite being asked not to on multiple occasions. this discussion is OVER, now im asking that you drop it. you were in the wrong. all posts breaking the TOS are gone now move on.
    - 24paperwings February 12, 2013, 11:51 am
    It's so sad that when you are called out, you change the topic to me. Very sad. I can admit when I am wrong. It would appear you can not. It's sad that I have to moderate a moderator. It's sad you can't live by the rules you expect of others. By the way, well done banning me, it seemed to have truly worked now didn't it. Yep you banned me and u cant post any more. You tried, you failed.
    - NotJohnEcash February 12, 2013, 7:56 pm
    believe what you like johne you've just been acting like a fool from mine and many others perspectives. please act your age, good day.
    - 24paperwings February 12, 2013, 7:59 pm
    Please no name calling. Calling some one a fool is offensive and a breach of the tos. As a moderator I would suggest you read and live by the tos. If you can't, how do you expect others to?

    Offensive Post
    Debates are ok, but rude, insulting, attacking, hateful, profane, threatening comments are not allowed. Be polite! Any offensive posts will be deleted.
    - NotJohnEcash February 12, 2013, 8:07 pm
    if i were name calling then the words would have been a lot less tame. I'm trying to be reasonable with you and drop this. you were in the wrong, thats the conclusion that was reached. good bye johne

    Hello! You've reached 24paperwings automated text messaging system, the user of this account is asking that you kindly move on, the issue you are referring to has been resolved in accordance with the TOS.
    - 24paperwings February 12, 2013, 9:03 pm
    Any fool can try to defend his mistakes--and most fools do--but it gives one a feeling of nobility to admit one's mistakes. By fighting, you never get enough, but by yielding, you get more than you expected.--Lawrence G. Lovasik
    - NotJohnEcash February 12, 2013, 9:16 pm
    I don't think you read the rules for the debate. Stop whining on my debate post; your ban is YOUR problem and no one else's. if you want to rant against 24paperwings, that's not of my or anyone else's concern on a RELIGIOUS DEBATE.
    - TheRussianBadger February 13, 2013, 5:46 pm
  • 1

    Oh I missed these. Well, I'm an atheist, also an agnostic and anti-theist. Basically that means I don't believe in god (atheist), but I also don't claim to have knowledge of his/her/its existence or lack thereof (agnostic), and I think on the whole, religion is a force for evil rather than good (anti-theist). There is literally no evidence for the existence of anything supernatural ever existing, so I don't think there's good reason to believe in the supernatural.

    • Ertrov
    • January 19, 2013, 1:06 am
    So your position is "don't believe without evidence"? I would have to agree with you there
    - TheRussianBadger January 20, 2013, 10:18 am
  • 1

    I'm an atheist, I was raised without religion and I have no interest in religion

  • 1

    I'm an agnostic who was very loosely raised christian. Religion has 0 impact on my life other than part of the christian side of my family disowning me. Could not care less about anything to do with any religion, personally. I do not hate people for having a religion though, and some of my friends are religious, but I believe religion does more harm than good overall.

    Shame about your family. While my grandparents were still alive, my parents and I had to pretend to be catholic for years to avoid getting shat on by my extended family. (Lied about going to mass, having me confirmed, etc.) We stopped going to mass when I was 12, mainly because this was when pedophilia scandals involving the church started getting media attention.

    But when you say you're agnositc, what do you mean? Agnostic refers certainty rather than belief. In my case, I'm an agnostic atheist (Don't know, therefore don't believe in god.) Do you lean to one side or another?
    - CrazyJay January 19, 2013, 2:45 pm
    I don't believe there is a god.
    - casper667 January 19, 2013, 6:25 pm
  • 1

    Atheist here. If any Christians feel like explaining the following to me, please do:
    There are colossal amounts of scientific evidence that prove various contradictions to the Bible, a prime and often-used example being evolution contradicting the Bible's suggested origins of the first humans. How do you remain Christian when such proven contradictions exist?

    I have heard people argue that the key point is to have faith. That faith is the redeeming feature in those worthy of heaven. Apart from a prospective utopia in which to spend eternity, the existence of which having never been even remotely proven, what's the incentive to have faith in God?

    I have also heard people argue flaws in the scientific breakthroughs that form these contradictions, such as gaps in fossil records. I'll be happy to discuss and possibly explain any "flaws" to the best of my knowledge. If you're a Christian who thinks these flaws exist, please tell me what they are.

    Christians, answer my three points:
    Explain scientifically proven contradictions to the Bible's teachings.
    Explain incentive to keep faith in God
    Explain "flaws" in scientific breakthroughs

    Although not technically christian i believe i can answers your points. Lets start with incentive, faith keeps you happy and full of hope which is good for a healthy life, giving you benefits to your mental and physical well-being. The other two points I can cover with the same base argument, contradictions in the bible were put there purposefully to test faith as well as spread madness to ensure the great old ones rise, which means the "flaws" of science is actually thinking there is any sort of order or law in the dreams of the blind idiot god Azathoth who is all there is and will be and who will awaken sucking the universe into primal and infinite chaos. I hope this response is a good explanation for you..
    - stolensoup January 25, 2013, 12:12 am
    Some nice points, but the problem with your point about Faith is that by definition, it is a belief in something without proof or evidence. Sure, a child may feel nice knowing that Santa is coming, but that isn't the truth. Second, I don't agree that believing in something without evidence does gives benefits to "mental and physical well being". If some stranger walked up to me and told me a magic invisible badger was in by yard and I just took his word for it, that would be considered Faith in an invisible badger, and I highly doubt that would benefit me in any mental or physical way.
    - TheRussianBadger January 25, 2013, 10:19 am
    First off the faith itself isnt what gives the benefits its the happiness caused by the faith, and happiness does have health benefits. Second I'm not sure you got the point of my response.
    - stolensoup January 26, 2013, 1:29 am
    Is false happiness really true happiness? And I am assuming most of it was fairly trolly. A.k.a. Azathoth.
    - Logos385 January 30, 2013, 2:47 pm
    doesn't matter happiness makes you healthier, doesn't make a difference if what you are happy about is real or fake. also yes it was mostly a troll comment.
    - stolensoup January 31, 2013, 1:46 am
    Sure, but it isn't it ultimately healthier to free yourself of delusion and still find happiness?
    - Logos385 January 31, 2013, 11:14 am
    no, believing in something that isnt real is not unhealthy so in terms of health they are equal.
    - stolensoup January 31, 2013, 5:09 pm
    You really think delusion is healthy...?
    - Logos385 January 31, 2013, 9:57 pm
    A delusion in itself is not an unhealthy thing, and although some delusions are caused by psychological disorders, in the case of religion delusions are basically taught to people, therefore there is nothing inherently unhealthy about them.
    - stolensoup February 6, 2013, 3:34 pm
    Why does a christian have to believe every story in bible to taken literally?
    Why isn't it possible to be a christian who believes in evolution?
    - Jofus1992 February 6, 2013, 10:13 pm
    "A delusion in itself is not an unhealthy thing, and although some delusions are caused by psychological disorders, in the case of religion delusions are basically taught to people, therefore there is nothing inherently unhealthy about them."

    I disagree with this. I believe health and correctly assessing reality are inevitably intertwined. Almost all Psychologists would agree, and I think the principle holds in itself.
    - Logos385 February 6, 2013, 10:43 pm
    That is absolutely possible! However, if you have no reliable holy book, why think the religion itself is reliable?
    - Logos385 February 6, 2013, 10:45 pm
    How would primitive people explain the creation of the world? A pretty good way would be to say god said, "poof" and it was there.

    I'm not a Christian like most people. I don't take absolutely everything in there to be the word of God himself. I think throughout the course of time people have distorted, added on to, and mistranslated the bible. I think the basic rules are about right. Be kind to people, don't steal, don't murder, ect. Example, in many translations of the bible one of the 10 commandments is "Thou shalt not kill." That seems to me like a pretty strange and ridiculous law. You're telling me that if someone is trying to do harm to me or my family/friends I'm supposed to not try to stop them and that joining the military is wrong too? I think that is an example of most likely a mis-translation It's very easy for words to be lost in translation.

    Also, I don't necessarily think that sex before marriage is wrong. What separates a married couple and a couple who deeply cares about each other? A few words.

    The book isn't completely useless. It can teach people how to live their life. Give people a reason to live the right way. Most people that are religious do the right thing about it. They don't get all up in other's business and even if they try to convert people they aren't assholes about it. Of course we've all met people who are assholes about it but people will fuck up anything.
    - Jofus1992 February 7, 2013, 1:57 pm
    So to you the Bible is pure philosophy?

    If it is, why believe what it says about a deity?
    - Logos385 February 7, 2013, 4:25 pm
    I do believe there is a God. I think things fit together in nature so well it wasn't coincidence. That is my evidence for divine intervention.
    - Jofus1992 February 7, 2013, 7:01 pm
    What do you mean by coincidence? Physical laws aren't "coincidence," they are natural, unbreakable constants (intrauniverse at least). Furthermore, human beings would die in 99.99% of the volume of the universe. Instantly. What exactly is fitting together "so well?"
    - Logos385 February 8, 2013, 12:42 pm
    What if the earth had been 20 million miles closer to the sun?
    What if life had been snuffed out in it's early single cell stages?

    It was pretty lucky for humans/life to exist. Had a few things happened a little differently we wouldn't be here.
    - Jofus1992 February 8, 2013, 11:29 pm
    Don't forget what if the moon was not there, if the earth axis was not tilted. The list goes on and one. Another great mind thought as you do now, my old friend Albert.
    - NotJohnEcash February 8, 2013, 11:57 pm
    On a macroscopic level, the Earth being in the "Goldilocks Zone" was determined not by chance, but by the workings of the physical constants acting since the start of the universe.
    ...It wasn't?

    The argument from fine tuning is a very bad one. First of all, there is an estimated 4.5 billion earth-like planets... In just our own galaxy! There are approximately 10^24 planets in our universe. By which I mean: 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets. That means, if the probability of life forming on any given planet is 1 in 1,000,000,000,000,000,000... We would still have 100,000 planets with life on them in the universe. I mean... Crazy, right?!

    Furthermore, when people make arguments about probabilities and about how it was so probabilistically impossible for life to exist, one must be skeptical. Let's say you take the probability of life existing on Earth, only considering earth. What in the world is your sample size? Probabilities are calculated as (# of successful events/# of all possible events). No one giving you that probability estimate knows of ANY other possible Earth, even one without life. This restricts us, scientifically, to say that the probability of having life on earth is 1/1. If you consider the probability of life forming in our universe? Same issue. You have a sample size of 1, and that 1 was successful.

    In order to say that the universe is fine-tuned for life, you have to make many dangerous assumptions and ignore the majority of the universe. Life would die instantly in 99.99%+ the volume of the universe. Our solar system is on a stellar time clock. When the sun blinks out, so does life here. Life exists on one measly planet for a brief period of time. How in the world is that a universe fine tuned for life? I mean, 95% of all species that have ever existed are extinct. That doesn't sound too life-friendly to me.
    - Logos385 February 9, 2013, 11:05 am
    I fully support the notion of life on other planets. I'm not just saying that life in itself is an accomplishment. I'm certain with the vastness of the universe there are other forms of life out there. But humans are so much different than other forms of life. We look at the sky and wonder, "What are all of those lights up there?".

    Another reason I believe in God is just personal experience. When I was in Afghanistan I had a couple of too close of calls to believe it was just "chance" that is the reason me and my buddies are alive.

    Maybe it was luck that saved my life over there. I can't tell you with a certainty that a God or supernatural entity has plans for the further down the road but I sure as hell believe there is.
    - Jofus1992 February 9, 2013, 8:44 pm
    To the first part- consciousness is a fantastic phenomena that is being increasingly understood by science: chemistry especially. But that doesn't mean it has supernatural origin.

    To the last two paragraphs... It seems like your real reason for belief is just that- faith. You recognize that it is unproven, but believe anyway. While I prefer to be scientific, not everyone does and that's ok. I would just be careful saying your reason for belief is anything other than faith, because in my estimation that really is your reason.
    - Logos385 February 10, 2013, 8:26 am
    What science is revealing to us about ourselves is truly fascinating. I personally think that "something" had a hand in our existence. Maybe we're just in a Sims computer game and some kid is making our world for us.

    Can I say with certainty, beyond a shadow of a doubt there is a God? Of course not and yes part of my belief is faith. There's not much religion without faith.
    - Jofus1992 February 11, 2013, 12:30 pm
    Is there any reason that "something" has to be anything other than the Universe, physical constants, and natural phenomena?
    - Logos385 February 11, 2013, 1:34 pm
    I'm sorry. I'm slightly intoxicated but I think you're asking, in a nutshell, "Does anything have to be because an entity created it?". My personal experiences and the evidence stated is good enough for me to believe in God.

    Maybe it's because of the way I was brought up. I was raised in an extremely Christian household. I am nothing like them except I believe in God. They are the strong right-wingers who wear those horse blinders when it comes to viewpoints and beliefs. It's very possible that if I was raised in a non-religious household I would look at it the same way you are. Who knows, maybe some people have some sort of genetic difference that makes them more likely to believe in some sort of God or Gods.
    - Jofus1992 February 12, 2013, 1:30 am
  • 1


    Why Deist?
    - Logos385 January 23, 2013, 9:00 pm
    Believe we were created by some sort of higher power. Don't believe there is any divine intervention of any sort in our lives. Live your life morally. Die. That's pretty much it.
    - Jjbigscreeners January 23, 2013, 9:26 pm
    Oh, my question was very poorly put X D. What makes you think that Deism is a correct description of our reality?
    - Logos385 January 23, 2013, 10:35 pm
    I don't necessarily think that it's correct, or more correct than others. It's just simple, pretty vague and hits on my main two beliefs. Not sure really how to put it into a sentence.
    - Jjbigscreeners January 23, 2013, 10:52 pm
    Ok, then how about why you believe in a higher power?
    - Logos385 January 23, 2013, 10:56 pm
    Too coincidental for there not to be I guess. Granted I'm sure that there are proposals that could show that it's not, but I probably wouldn't comprehend them with my current 12th grade education. I can't really picture a true beginning happening on its own.
    - Jjbigscreeners January 23, 2013, 11:02 pm
    What exactly is too coincidental? And never underestimate your comprehensive power at any stage of education.

    Do you reject the Big Bang Theory, then, as a "true beginning?"
    - Logos385 January 23, 2013, 11:30 pm
    How everything in the universe works orderly. My understanding of the Big Bang Theory probably isn't accurate. I just can't see how there would be nothing at all, and then something would be created suddenly. Feel free to enlighten me. I know we've talked about stuff like this before.
    - Jjbigscreeners January 24, 2013, 4:20 pm
    Well, there was never a true "nothingness." There was always energy and the fluctuation of the vacuum and vacuum energy. It's true that "nothing comes from nothing," but in reality, there was never, ever "nothing." : ).

    As for order, that really has to do with universal symmetry, and that makes sense. Once a couple assumptions are seen to be likely, many statements that seem to "order" the universe come naturally. You'd be surprised how many physical laws come from the statement that "all laws of physics are the same in every direction."
    - Logos385 January 24, 2013, 4:50 pm
    So BBT says that something happened to that energy (explosion?) causing our universe as we know it to be created?
    - Jjbigscreeners January 24, 2013, 5:27 pm
    Curious for a response.
    - Jjbigscreeners January 27, 2013, 11:14 pm
    Jjbigscreeners, as Logos385 said there was never nothingness. We exist between what is called the Big Bang and the Big Crunch. This theory is called the Big Bounce theory. We are in a cycle of a Big Crunch where everything collapses into itself. The Big Bang is when everything expands again. Hence the name Big Bounce It's just a cycle... It's the circle of life! (Ember couldn't help herself.)
    - ember January 27, 2013, 11:44 pm
    There are frequent, spontaneous fluctuations in the vacuum energy. The idea is that the start of our universe was one of those fluctuations. Essentially. It's much more complicated and specific than that... more complicated than I truly understand, of course.

    However, we are most definitely not between a "Big Bang" and a "Big Crunch." The universe is expanding at an ever-increasing rate. This means that it will not collapse back in on itself. Whether it has before, we aren't sure. All we know is that this time, it won't!
    - Logos385 January 28, 2013, 1:33 am
  • 1

    Explain scientifically proven contradictions to the Bible's teachings.
    Although im not Christian (Im Catholic) id be happy to answer these. Well not answers but insights i guess. As a Catholic I also am a man of science. I have noticed certain contradictions within the bible, but again the bible was written by a man. Not by god, not by jesus, not by any supernatural being most religious people claim. The bible is merely a book that "claims" that jesus was alive and did this and that. More of a "fairytale" if u wanna call it. I can see why it's hard to believe in any of the things the bible says due to the fact of the extreme exaggeration in the book. Usually my favorite part of the bible is the revelation parts cause they provide interesting quotes about the end of times lol. However i will not quote the bible nor do I praise that the bible is a legit piece of writing that details the existence of god. However, I will hold that the bible is merely a guide. Why? If u think about it, when u read the bible (which i doubt u will), u notice, like i said, is pretty much an exaggerated story of jesus and god. But every story has a purpose right? I can see how the bible can teach u things about life (disregarding certain rules which are beyond retarded). I only follow the ten commandments. If any of you have paid attention at school you can see how the ten commandments correlate to the social contract which was upheld by Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau . Just to refresh ur memories, we can basically do wutever the fck we want in nature. We have the right in nature to do anything. But, do we? In a society we dont. we give up that right to protect our other rights. Why do we give it up? because its common sense. Its something we call morals and its wut we call "right". We always want to do good not bad. Like the ten commandments, one of them say Love thy neighbor, and Honor they father and mother. Its common sense. We do those things because in our heads its the right thing to do. You dont really have to follow it but I will tell u that if u hate ur neighbor just because or u trash and disrespect ur parents just because u feel like it without a reason. Then ur just an asshole plain and simple. I deviated from the question so ill answer it now lol. Science cannot be disproved. Fact is fact. I am catholic. I believe in god, but i do not believe in disregarding science. There are contradictions within the bible. Like James Madison once said "Knowledge will forever govern ignorance". I've seen it, and science has proven it. Why deny it? Why be ignorant?
    Explain incentive to keep faith in God
    So why keep faith in god huh? Tough one lol. I just do. U cant scientifically prove or disprove feelings. I just want to keep my faith in god cuz he gives me hope. I pray because i believe. Ive heard people tell me "so if a flying spaghetti monster gave u shiz wud u believe in him too?" Ofc not. Why? because there is no feeling. No sense of light so to speak. (Feels like im talking mumbo jumbo lol) Its like this. If u dont believe, u dont feel anything. If u believe (and i mean honestly believe, not fcking become a scientist and be like " time to test my experiment on believing" no. Science cannot disprove nor prove feelings) you will feel something. Its something deep inside that makes u realize, there is something there. You dont know wut it cant see it..but u can feel it. U just feel it. Sounds like a bullshit answer, but thats pretty much how it is. Whether u believe me or not is up to u but thats how it is. From a genuine god believer.
    Explain "flaws" in scientific breakthroughs
    Like i stated before, there is no such thing as flaws in breakthroughs. Denying science is just being ignorant. ur refusing to acknowledge something that was proven. So yah. Besides that i dont have a problem if u think all religion is retarded and shit. I cud careless if any believe im an idiot for believing. Why? Because Im me. Its who I am and im not gunna change just because some people counter argue about a flying spaghetti monster being equal to the talking dead guy we believe in. But anywho. Hope u are satisfied with ur answers lol.

    • OhEmGee
    • January 19, 2013, 5:24 pm
    While you make a nice case for your own faith, I have a question: why do you believe when there is no factual based scientific evidence? Not trying to sound insulting in any way, just curious
    - TheRussianBadger January 20, 2013, 10:15 am
    Well because I do. I know it seems weird. Considering that I love science and fact. Its just that I hold something inside that makes me believe. Ill tell ya this. Even if u did prove me wrong. And u managed to prove that god didnt exist. I wud still believe in god. Why? because its a feeling that I have. Id be ignorant and in denial ofc, but at the same time I'd have some type of hope. Science holds solutions, but when all is lost what do u have left? What else can I put my hopes into? I guess its just hope. It gives a sense of security. Even though science can't back me up, why do i have to give up a hope that I believe in to become logical? You get wut i mean? Its just a feeling. We believe because we want to. I believe because I want to. Cuz I just have the certain feeling that science can't answer lol. Its something i cant well explain myself. You just have to experience it to get wut im saying. Srry if my answer wasnt enough lol. I also want to mention that if i put all my faith all my beliefs into science, but science can't answer something. What else can i do? If science gives me an inconclusive answer wut can i fall back on? (Just assuming lol) If i dont believe in anything but rely on science. but at the sametime science fails me, wut does one do? Does one give up...does one just leave it alone? Does one accept its not possible? Thast wut im getting at. Sometimes...god gives us just a bit of hope...even if it doesn't gives us some hope. As some put it...seeking help from god is the same as seeking help from a giant spaghetti monster. It just wont happen right? Well. Thats just u. Sometimes...even if it seems illogical, even if it seems impossible...there are certain things that happen we can't explain. We can't fully comprehend why it happened. Can it be god? or is something natural? who knows...but regarding a miracle as something natural makes it seem like its normal. It makes it seem as if it happens all the time. Thats why people regard miracles as acts of god. Because something good happened when it was needed the most. Because of that, people have wished for miracles in dire times of need. When one is sick. when one is missing, when one is in trouble. Science can only help us so much. So everyone falls back on a little bit of hope...that maybe that one being...that one god...will just do something...and bring hope. I also apologize if i seem like a priest lmao. Bottom line. Science is one thing, but hoping is another. But maybe thats just me.
    - OhEmGee January 23, 2013, 6:49 pm
    While that was kind of hard to decipher, I have a question to start off a more focused discussion. You say you believe in God because you "feel" one. Is there anything else in your life you believe in because you "feel" it?
    - Logos385 January 23, 2013, 10:57 pm
    Ya there is. Wouldnt say alot of things but I do believe that nothing is impossible. Theres a solution to everything. I guess i feel it. I mean....things that science claims "impossible" might seem so right now. But is it really? In the 18th century (for example) sending a man to the moon seemed like something a madman wud say right? 200 years later it happened. As we progress, we find new solutions. I believe (I literally do) that one day maybe someone will give me evidence of whether or not a supreme being exists. You can say right now it doesnt right? But u have no evidence. Most (from what I know...if theres something im missing you can call me on it if u wish lol) people use the flying spaghetti monster arguement to prove a point about the existence of god. Ya, when it comes to science, believing in something natural/ non existent is just ridiculous right? Well it kinda goes the other way. Using science can u really disprove god? Like can u really give me physical evidence he doesnt exist? This is wut most religious people might ask u right? Ur response will probably be the flying spaghetti monster arguement if not itd be some type of counter arguement that really doesnt show any definite proof. BUT....we cant also prove that god exists right? Now back to the feeling. If we cant prove nor disprove god wut can we really say about it? To all religious people. It becomes a feeling. A belief...a ray of hope that we have deep inside. When one does not believe (im just assuming...hurts my arguement but work with me here lol) that person doesnt feel anything. That person questions the very fabric of why religions exists. Why do we pray? Why do we believe? And presumes, based on how the world is, god doesnt exist. My friend whos an athiest asked me why do I believe and that why do i feel it. He also told me if that god existed why doesnt help those in need like in poor countries. Why is there hate, war. Why doesnt god do anything if he "so good". To be honest. Idk. I cant really give a firm answer. But heres wut i believe or think. Ill give an example. Doesnt sound good but i guess itll do for now lol. Imagine god being the owner of an mmorpg (yes nerd status i know) God can control everything and create anything just like a dev. An imagine the players as the population of the world. Now. When a player is being picked on, being trolled, being targeted, or when players are poor. Do the devs go and interfere? No. Cuz they are there to assist in emergencies right? Like if u get hacked or stuff. So how does this apply to the real world? Well its the same thing. We have freewill. We have the capabilities to do wutever the fck we want. Wut happens solely lands on us. But wait a minute....the suffering is not the peoples fault its the governent that rules over the people so why doesnt god help? As cruel as it may seem, theres a reason why. I dont know wut that reason nor can i back it up with any evidence, but lets assume god magically came down and saved the suffering people. What wud happen? People will rely on him for EVERYTHING. The world is fcked up as it is and if we spoil it then itll get worse and worse. The way i see it, god can only guide us. Not intervene, not tell us wut to do. He gives us choices and make them everyday (not literally hes the one that gives us choices) but we make choices in our lives. We have the will to make our own future. NOW. Idk if i strayed from the question or not...but in order to understand this "feeling" you have to believe in something you cant really comprehend. No im not saying to believe in a flying monster or a shoe or anything. It doesnt have to be god either. Just believe that even when everything fails. that there is still hope. (Hmm idk if i even made sense x.x)
    - OhEmGee January 24, 2013, 8:48 pm
    Hmm. I think you miss the point of the Flying Spaghetti Monster response you seem to get often. It is about the "Burden of Proof."

    In science there is something called the "null hypothesis." This is a testable explanation for the state of reality that is the "default" explanation. One example of a "null hypothesis" is seeing a woman walking a baby down a street in stroller: you might ask the question, "I wonder who that baby's mother is." The "null hypothesis" here is that the baby is the son of the woman pushing it in the stroller. This may not be correct, but until we prove it wrong, it is a pretty safe assumption.

    The idea of a "null hypothesis" is to get a "Default" starting point for every scientific question, and to deviate from that starting point only when sufficient evidence tells us to. A kind of "innocent until proven guilty" attitude towards the default assumption. While my analogy wasn't perfect, it serves its purpose.

    How this applies to the God question: The question one asks here is, "How was the universe created?" The "default" answer, or, the "null hypothesis," is that it was created naturally. The default that we see is the natural world and its makeup, while anything on top of the natural world is an extraneous proposition. This means that God, or the idea that God created the universe? Is an extraneous proposition. In order for it to be believed above a null hypothesis, there must be solid evidence behind it.

    You recognize that you can't prove God scientifically. If you were to continue being scientific, you would end there, and not believe in a deity, and accept the null hypothesis. However, you decide to abandon science and delve into the land of "feeling." Really, "feelings" aren't reliable. We have irrational fears, or, "Feelings," all the time. We have excitable hopes, etc. A "feeling" is unreliable evidence, and really is not admissible in the discussion of a scientific question. I.e. "feelings" aren't admissible in the discussion of the God Hypothesis.
    - Logos385 January 25, 2013, 5:18 pm
    You recognize that you can't prove God scientifically. If you were to continue being scientific, you would end there, and not believe in a deity, and accept the null hypothesis ←---- Thats wut u said right? Ik i cant prove him and u claim "if" i continued being scientific i wud end there and not believe in god. But are u implying i shud became atheist and accept that god doesnt exist? I mean. I never mentioned that he created the universe or anything. I go with the big bang theory but at the same time that theory is bit iffy do to the fact we come out of nothing. Its like trying to divide by zero. We're trying to get something from nothing. Also according to the general definition of a "hypothesis" it means its a general statement or assumption. Using the scientific method u go from hypothesis to theory. So for now, by observing u offered a hypothesis. Meaning u assumed why something happened. Therefore the null hypothesis is something i dont really have to take at heart or listen to. I mean. Ill acknowledge it, but at the same time its just an assumed answer based on observation. So in reality the null hypothesis is not a "default answer" as you speak but a default assumption. Answers and assumptions are 2 different things. However i do agree that god is an extraneous proposition. Hard to believe. No proof. Nothing. Nada. However, i do not abandon science. I believe in it. But at the same time, science can be stubborn. Since science cant comprehend "why" people believe in a deity, it questions the fundamental basings of religion. I want to ask you this. Why do people who dont believe in god try so hard to prove that god doesnt exist? I mean we can just end it here and go on with our day. Ik this is a discussion, but i mean, cant a person live believing in something without being questioned? Thats wut im confused at. I mean. I cant prove god. I cant provide evidence, hell maybe he isnt real? But i still believe. How is it that hard to just accept that people have faith in something that science cant comprehend? Also, when i talked about feelings as my answer to the question, it wasn't to provide any reliable evidence to anything. The question was..why do I believe? There is absolutely NO scientific method to calculate or prove why I believe. I answered to the best of my ability to why I believe. I do because I do. Im not avoiding the question. I can't scientifically explain the whole process. There is no chemical reaction, no calculations as to why I believe. It's something I have that makes me believe. If i were to explain then id just make u confused. Also the question was generally stated. Look at the question not only by the scientific view but by the general view. If u ask "scientifically" why something occurs and u ignore the rest of the factors, I can gurantee u, u will miss something. You also have to account how people feel when they believe, why do they feel that way, wut is it that motivates them to believe. When you consider these questions you have to consider feelings. Considering a certain factor as "unreliable" will throw u off a bit. Don"t consider things that seem ridiculous. Sometimes the most ridiculous factors/assumptions can sometimes be the way to go. I mean, to someone who dead on on science and fact will consider "feelings" as a certain factor to ignore cause maybe theyd think its unreliable or has no general effect to the reason or result. Not really. Feeling has a pretty good impact on this. Alot of people feel strongly about god. Some dont. Some dont care. When looking at this question, look at it from all sides. Not just the scientific side. Besides, this is just me btw lol, i rather believe in something and live my life being labeled as irrational, than to give in just to be rational. I mean you have your points and you make very good claims that even I cant fully answer, but I want to believe. Its out my own freewill to choose right? God seems like a far fetched concept but I believe just because I want to. I "feel" the need to. Reliable or not. Why someone does something differs from person to person. You can't really make a general common claim as to why people do it. People have their reasons and to question that is to question why you dont believe in god. Its simple for u guys. U guys deem it irrational, you abandoned ur belief in search for truth. I am all for the truth, but u can't force a "truth" on someone. Lol. Im willing to acknowledge it, doesnt mean I have to abide to it. If its fact its fact. If you guys proved me wrong then ok lol. Ill still believe. Its something I "feel" the need to. Wuts gonna happen tho? The scientific community will deem religious people as nutjobs/ ignorant/ stupid. I mean Im fine with that. Not that it wud make any difference in my life. But assuming you got ur way, ud be taking something away from alot of people. Thats no different than a bully taking a nerd's lunch money. I mean we have our wrongdoings as well, we tend to force our religion on people but its simple to counteract that. Just decline and say you dont believe or ur not interested. Then if they keep pestering u then ya, by all means, show no mercy and argue with them about god just to see them fail lol. But again, I believe because of my feeling. I stand by it. Scientific or not, It's something that I just have.
    - OhEmGee January 26, 2013, 1:33 am
    First, I would like to request that you try and trim your responses down a bit. They are a bit long to keep a focused discussion going.

    Next, I would like to address some misconceptions.
    -A hypothesis is a testable explanation for observed phenomena. Not simply a "guess."
    -The "null hypothesis" is a necessary principle of the scientific method. It is the base observations of the world that act as a default to test all explanations on top of. The existence of the "natural world" is the only assumption required to accept the "null hypothesis."
    -Being an atheist does NOT mean accepting that god does not exist. It simply means NOT accepting that god exists. I do not believe that there is no god, I simply don't believe in any specific God-claim. That is the atheistic, and standard scientific, viewpoint.
    -Science absolutely understands WHY people believe in God. Evolutionary psychology, standard psychology, many branches of neuroscience, as well as other behavioral sciences all have quite satisfying explanations for the commonality of supernatural belief in humanity.

    Finally, I have no problem with you or anyone else believing whatever they want. But you simply can't believe in the supernatural and say that your beliefs accurately align with science. You can say you believe in God unscientifically. However, you can't say you believe in God scientifically when you do not. And can't.

    PS. All caps should be read as bold or italicized. Not meant as yelling, just as slight emphasis.
    - Logos385 January 27, 2013, 4:21 pm
    But you simply can't believe in the supernatural and say that your beliefs accurately align with science. You can say you believe in God unscientifically. However, you can't say you believe in God scientifically when you do not. And can't. ←-- I never said my beliefs accurately align with science nor did I ever say I believe in god scientifically. I merely stated i cannot scientifically explain why I believe in good or why I pray. I tried to, but I cant. I believe because I believe plain and simple. I am a man of science. But i believe in god. Just because I have some faith in science, it doesn't mean I can thoroughly explain scientifically why. I don't know where u got this assumption where I believe in god scientifically. All of my answers were answered as best as i could and I even gave an answer where I was beyond being scientific, but I leave it for now. I gave my insights. Just know that I do not believe in god scientifically. I believe because I believe. There is no scientific way to explain.

    P.S I enjoyed discussing this with u haha. You brought some interesting points to say the least :P
    - OhEmGee January 27, 2013, 5:46 pm
    "I am a man of science. But i believe in god."
    To make this statement, you need to add a caveat. "I am a man of science except where religion is concerned. I believe in God." That statement? I have no issue with. The first one? Isn't quite acceptable.
    - Logos385 January 27, 2013, 5:49 pm
    why tho? Thats wut i dont follow. Why is it that when I say I am a man of science, why does that automatically seem i have to regard everything as scientific? I mean, When i say I am a man of science, I believe and heed most of what science has proven. But once the topic falls in religion Thats where the science part of me does not cross. Why can't I put those two sentences together? Thats wut i dont get lol. However I'm not gunna change it. I will say it again. I am a man of science, and I believe in god. Whether u accept it or not. If it offends u in any way I aplogoize but I will not change it. >.<

    Update: I changed my mind. It really doesn't matter lol. No point in getting frisky over this. This was just a discussion haha.
    - OhEmGee January 27, 2013, 6:17 pm
    Haha, I'm just trying to protect the idea of science and scientific inquiry. I just find it disingenuous to, in the same sentence, claim you are a "man of science" and immediately profess belief in something "unscientific." Oxymoronic, eh?
    - Logos385 January 28, 2013, 1:24 am
  • 1

    Ember believes that the world was created in three days. This is because three is the best number. It was created by a cat named Gregbert. Ember believes this due to many reasons.

    1. Gregbert is invisible and magic so you can't touch smell or taste him. That means that you can't tell Ember he is not real.

    2. If you believe hard enough anything is possible.

    3. Ember had a dream about him once, Gregbert and Ember drank tea together. Gregbert asked Ember why she was drinking tea even though she hates it. Ember did not ever tell Gregbert this therefore Gregbert used his all knowingness to know that Ember does not like tea.

    Ember believes in evolution too. Gregbert evolved dinosaurs into people. Think about it, if he didn't would we not still have dinosaurs around today? But we don't, instead we have people.

    • ember
    • January 27, 2013, 10:34 pm
    All hail Gregbert!
    - Ertrov January 28, 2013, 1:32 am
    May he live long and prosper.
    - ember January 30, 2013, 2:35 pm
  • 1

    I believe that religion can be a very good thing for some people. It allows them to live a life of happiness doing good. This is all fine and well until someone comes along and says that they think differently. Then shit goes down.

    Anywho, I like to think that the world is the world. The universe is what it is, and it was created by the big bang. We evolved into our (kinda stupid, i think. Who doesn't want a tail to help them climb with?) current state.

    I would call myself an atheist agnostic. If there was a god, or higher power, i believe that he/she/it only started the cycle, and has had no further contact with our universe or worlds.

    I also believe that we should live our lives as moral people because it is the right thing to do, and not because a book tells us to "do what I say or you go to hell and burn for all of eternity". I like to think that when i do a nice thing, its because I am a nice person, and not because i want to go to heaven over hell.

    Overall, i believe that religion is a VERY bad thing for society. Remember the dark ages? Imagine how much further along we would be if we had continued scientific exploration during those 800-1000 years? We might actually have flying cars. Instead we are where we are today.

    *Side note: you may notice how often i said "I believe". That's because we are talking about religion. While we do have some very firm proof, such as the big bang theory, and evolution, until we have concrete evidence showing beyond a doubt that the big bang happened, and it becomes actual fact, there will be those who will disbelieve it and continue their beliefs in religion. Religion is an opinion and thoughts against religion are beliefs. At least until proven otherwise.

    Only part of the post I want to address: we do have concrete evidence for the BBT in the form of cosmic background radiation, galactic redshift, astronomical mass distribution, cosmic net spin, and commonality of elements.
    - Logos385 January 30, 2013, 11:18 am
  • 1

    I think futurama had the best idea.
    There is a god. If you do it right nobody notices it.
    I think many people just over do their religious stuff. Everyone should choose for himself but god is not there to do all shit for you, that is why we have the free will. And the bible is just a book with stories you should live by.
    If everyone would live by the bible, you dont have to believe that everything is true in there, it would be a perfect world.
    But because we are humans and have flaws there are people who start interpret shit in there and think they can decide what god wants and so on.

    But I dont think a world without religion would be better. Back then religion was very important because otherwise the world could've been worse. Maybe not.

    Maybe without religion killing would still be okay. There are many things that could be better or worse, we dont know.
    As an atheist you dont believe that you get punished for being a bad person so actually you could do whatever you want. And thousand years ago for example who knows what else would've happen.

    If you have a religion live by it, because then you are a good person, which is the most important thing in all religions.
    If you are a atheist just be a good person.

    • Vans
    • January 29, 2013, 1:22 pm
    Hmm. Why is the Bible worth living by? It promotes slavery, demotes family, blames rape victims for their rape, depicts genocide-by-deity, and lauds a very screwed up form of proxy-justice that really makes no sense.

    The impulse to not kill is just that- an impulse. An inborn trait all healthy humans have. Realistically, you don't refrain from murder because religion tells you to. You do it because the thought is wholly unappealling and appalling. It is programmed, as evolutionary psychology demonstrates, into our genes to not commit murder. Nothing, at all, to do with religion.

    If you are an atheist, you believe you are punished for all your worldly actions in an immediate, worldly way. If you are religious, you can fall back on the fact that you believe and subsequently use death bed conversion as an out to bad behavior. You talk about a thousand years ago, and imply things would have been much worse without religion. But what about the Dark Ages? The Crusades? The Inquisition? I'm not attempting to build a case that religion made things worse, just showing that your statement is far from accurate.

    Being a good person is not the most important thing in many monotheistic religions: faith is. Unquestioning belief. You go to heaven in Christianity if you believe, no matter your actions. Jihadists can ascend in Islam. Etc.

    The idea that religion and morality are intertwined is incorrect, and frankly? Dangerous.
    - Logos385 January 30, 2013, 11:15 am
  • 1

    Man, I was disinclined post my views on this because I've been arguing about religion on this site at every given chance for way too long. But since this has been on the front page for a while now, I'll weigh in...agian.

    I'm an atheist, former catholic. You probably already see where I'm going with this. It all started when I learned about the child molestation and other scandals going on in the church. (I would have been 11 or 12.) My family decided we couldn't be associated with the church shortly afterward. (Who are they to tell us how to live our lives when they've been covering this shit up for decades, hell, centuries?)

    This aside, there are several arguments you can make against the morality of say, the bible (slaverly endorsements, shitting on rape victims etc.) But I think it's far simpler than that. The bible was written by primitive people. People who couldn't tell you where the sun went at night, what an atom was or even how magnets work! So how can I believe they knew god's will? If one is already disinclined to kill, rape, steal or commit actions to physically/emotionally hurt others (intentionally anyways) then faith serves no purpose on either the moral/intellectual level. There are plenty of reasons not to commit any of the aforementioned acts besides "God doesn't want me too."

Related Posts