Originally posted by: TuxDave
Hey Rip, since you're posting this article, I'm assuming you respect his new revelation. But if he doesn't believe in the Christian God, why do you still praise him? Isn't 'no God' just as bad as 'other Gods'?
Ever read The Footprints of God? Similar idea.Originally posted by: IAteYourMother
Originally posted by: Skoorb
There is something to be said for that. I've yet to hear of a scientific explanation for the beginning of time/universe. People say "big bang", but where did that mass come from? What caused it to bang? No matter how far you go back science is inherently unable, due to its cause and effect nature, to explain how the universe could have begun.Antony Flew has concluded that some sort of intelligence or first cause must have created the universe. A super-intelligence is the only good explanation for the origin of life and the complexity of nature,
unless the big bang was God :shocked:
Originally posted by: Eavan
Oh, so much friendliness here tonight. It warms my heart :evil:
Seriously. I don't think he was trying to convert any of you, so why don't we put down the battle axes, eh? If you think it's so stupid and worthless and if he is such a troll then why oh why did you give him the satisfaction of commenting on it?
By the way, I have no opinion whatsoever on the article. I could care less about this scientist and his beliefs, but I've really never seen such hostile reactions as when somebody mentions religion on ATOT. Unfortunately a good portion of the world believes in some higher power, and they probably don't care that you think they're morons--I doubt you'll convince them otherwise by comments such as these.
Now if you'll excuse me I need to get back to procrastinating on some much needed studying for finals.
I see the two of you are adding oh so much intelligent conversation to this thread. :roll:Originally posted by: rpc64
Geez, go away you moronic flamers! I think it was an interesting article, regardless of your beliefs. I don't go in P&N and am not familiar with what kinds of threads the OP starts usually, but he wasn't attacking anyone or saying anything trolling in this particular thread. People just love a chance to start a fight and/or insult people over the internet and you've found religion to be an easy area to draw insults from. Fvcking pathetic. If you don't like the story just go away.
Perhaps so, but by science's very nature there is no way that it can explain the beginning of time. That doesn't mean that science should be thrown away. It has its uses, but nobody should be putting their entire belief system into it/naturalism.Originally posted by: IAteYourMother
Originally posted by: Skoorb
There is something to be said for that. I've yet to hear of a scientific explanation for the beginning of time/universe. People say "big bang", but where did that mass come from? What caused it to bang? No matter how far you go back science is inherently unable, due to its cause and effect nature, to explain how the universe could have begun.Antony Flew has concluded that some sort of intelligence or first cause must have created the universe. A super-intelligence is the only good explanation for the origin of life and the complexity of nature,
unless the big bang was God :shocked:
Can you get any more myopic?Originally posted by: Riprorin
Originally posted by: TuxDave
Hey Rip, since you're posting this article, I'm assuming you respect his new revelation. But if he doesn't believe in the Christian God, why do you still praise him? Isn't 'no God' just as bad as 'other Gods'?
I hope and pray that his acknowledgement that "some sort of intelligence or first cause" created the universe will someday lead to a saving faith in the one true God.
Originally posted by: Riprorin
Originally posted by: TuxDave
Hey Rip, since you're posting this article, I'm assuming you respect his new revelation. But if he doesn't believe in the Christian God, why do you still praise him? Isn't 'no God' just as bad as 'other Gods'?
I hope and pray that his acknowledgement that "some sort of intelligence or first cause" created the universe will someday lead to a saving faith in the one true God.
Originally posted by: werk
Originally posted by: Eavan
Oh, so much friendliness here tonight. It warms my heart :evil:
Seriously. I don't think he was trying to convert any of you, so why don't we put down the battle axes, eh? If you think it's so stupid and worthless and if he is such a troll then why oh why did you give him the satisfaction of commenting on it?
By the way, I have no opinion whatsoever on the article. I could care less about this scientist and his beliefs, but I've really never seen such hostile reactions as when somebody mentions religion on ATOT. Unfortunately a good portion of the world believes in some higher power, and they probably don't care that you think they're morons--I doubt you'll convince them otherwise by comments such as these.
Now if you'll excuse me I need to get back to procrastinating on some much needed studying for finals.
I see the two of you are adding oh so much intelligent conversation to this thread. :roll:Originally posted by: rpc64
Geez, go away you moronic flamers! I think it was an interesting article, regardless of your beliefs. I don't go in P&N and am not familiar with what kinds of threads the OP starts usually, but he wasn't attacking anyone or saying anything trolling in this particular thread. People just love a chance to start a fight and/or insult people over the internet and you've found religion to be an easy area to draw insults from. Fvcking pathetic. If you don't like the story just go away.
That said, I'm out of this thread. I feel dirty for staying so long in one of Riprorin's threads. I'm going to take a shower.
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Perhaps so, but by science's very nature there is no way that it can explain the beginning of time. That doesn't mean that science should be thrown away. It has its uses, but nobody should be putting their entire belief system into it/naturalism.Originally posted by: IAteYourMother
Originally posted by: Skoorb
There is something to be said for that. I've yet to hear of a scientific explanation for the beginning of time/universe. People say "big bang", but where did that mass come from? What caused it to bang? No matter how far you go back science is inherently unable, due to its cause and effect nature, to explain how the universe could have begun.Antony Flew has concluded that some sort of intelligence or first cause must have created the universe. A super-intelligence is the only good explanation for the origin of life and the complexity of nature,
unless the big bang was God :shocked:
Originally posted by: Eli
Can you get any more myopic?Originally posted by: Riprorin
Originally posted by: TuxDave
Hey Rip, since you're posting this article, I'm assuming you respect his new revelation. But if he doesn't believe in the Christian God, why do you still praise him? Isn't 'no God' just as bad as 'other Gods'?
I hope and pray that his acknowledgement that "some sort of intelligence or first cause" created the universe will someday lead to a saving faith in the one true God.
The "one true god", huh. Which one true God is that? Oh, the one you believe in. So since every individual has a different world-view, does that mean that there are some 6 billion "true" Gods? Since, of course, everyones viewpoint is the only one that is correct.. from their individual point of view.
How do you know you've picked the real Real true God?
Should I have wished that he believe in a false god?
Because he has been blinded by the light, so to speak.Originally posted by: TuxDave
Originally posted by: Riprorin
Originally posted by: TuxDave
Hey Rip, since you're posting this article, I'm assuming you respect his new revelation. But if he doesn't believe in the Christian God, why do you still praise him? Isn't 'no God' just as bad as 'other Gods'?
I hope and pray that his acknowledgement that "some sort of intelligence or first cause" created the universe will someday lead to a saving faith in the one true God.
So.... 'other God' is better off that 'no God'. So why are you so friendly to this and offering your prayers, yet when it comes to the topic of Islams, you turn into an angry demon?
Originally posted by: Riprorin
Should I have wished that he believe in a false god?
But that is exactly my point. What is a "false" god? From (someone elses) point of view, your God is "false". From your point of view, their God is "false". There are as many religions as there are people on the planet.Originally posted by: Riprorin
Originally posted by: Eli
Can you get any more myopic?Originally posted by: Riprorin
Originally posted by: TuxDave
Hey Rip, since you're posting this article, I'm assuming you respect his new revelation. But if he doesn't believe in the Christian God, why do you still praise him? Isn't 'no God' just as bad as 'other Gods'?
I hope and pray that his acknowledgement that "some sort of intelligence or first cause" created the universe will someday lead to a saving faith in the one true God.
The "one true god", huh. Which one true God is that? Oh, the one you believe in. So since every individual has a different world-view, does that mean that there are some 6 billion "true" Gods? Since, of course, everyones viewpoint is the only one that is correct.. from their individual point of view.
How do you know you've picked the real Real true God?
Should I have wished that he believe in a false god?
Originally posted by: TuxDave
Originally posted by: Riprorin
Should I have wished that he believe in a false god?
Why not? That's the same God that you're worshipping.
ZING!!! OK ok..I take that back.
Originally posted by: Mo0o
OMG THANKS FOR THE INFO IM GOING TO BE CHRISTIAN NOW
PS. overbearing christians like you make me glad to be agnostic
Flew said he's best labeled a deist like Thomas Jefferson, whose God was not actively involved in people's lives.
"I'm thinking of a God very different from the God of the Christian and far and away from the God of Islam, because both are depicted as omnipotent Oriental despots, cosmic Saddam Husseins," he said. "It could be a person in the sense of a being that has intelligence and a purpose, I suppose."
Originally posted by: werk
Originally posted by: Eavan
Oh, so much friendliness here tonight. It warms my heart :evil:
Seriously. I don't think he was trying to convert any of you, so why don't we put down the battle axes, eh? If you think it's so stupid and worthless and if he is such a troll then why oh why did you give him the satisfaction of commenting on it?
By the way, I have no opinion whatsoever on the article. I could care less about this scientist and his beliefs, but I've really never seen such hostile reactions as when somebody mentions religion on ATOT. Unfortunately a good portion of the world believes in some higher power, and they probably don't care that you think they're morons--I doubt you'll convince them otherwise by comments such as these.
Now if you'll excuse me I need to get back to procrastinating on some much needed studying for finals.
I see the two of you are adding oh so much intelligent conversation to this thread. :roll:Originally posted by: rpc64
Geez, go away you moronic flamers! I think it was an interesting article, regardless of your beliefs. I don't go in P&N and am not familiar with what kinds of threads the OP starts usually, but he wasn't attacking anyone or saying anything trolling in this particular thread. People just love a chance to start a fight and/or insult people over the internet and you've found religion to be an easy area to draw insults from. Fvcking pathetic. If you don't like the story just go away.
That said, I'm out of this thread. I feel dirty for staying so long in one of Riprorin's threads. I'm going to take a shower.
Originally posted by: Eli
But that is exactly my point. What is a "false" god? From (someone elses) point of view, your God is "false". From your point of view, their God is "false". There are as many religions as there are people on the planet.Originally posted by: Riprorin
Originally posted by: Eli
Can you get any more myopic?Originally posted by: Riprorin
Originally posted by: TuxDave
Hey Rip, since you're posting this article, I'm assuming you respect his new revelation. But if he doesn't believe in the Christian God, why do you still praise him? Isn't 'no God' just as bad as 'other Gods'?
I hope and pray that his acknowledgement that "some sort of intelligence or first cause" created the universe will someday lead to a saving faith in the one true God.
The "one true god", huh. Which one true God is that? Oh, the one you believe in. So since every individual has a different world-view, does that mean that there are some 6 billion "true" Gods? Since, of course, everyones viewpoint is the only one that is correct.. from their individual point of view.
How do you know you've picked the real Real true God?
Should I have wished that he believe in a false god?
Does that make either one of your viewpoints any less valid? No. Does it make either of you a better or worse person? No.
It's up to you how you live your life; whether you're a happy person or not.
You should strive to be a good person regardless of what you believe in. You shouldn't need scare tactics condemning you to Hell to cause you to live life "correctly". Religion is a crutch. If you need it to have hope & compassion or whatever, that's great. But it's still not as good as walking with your own two feet and thinking with your own head.
Stop saying that, it isn't based on science. If anything, it is based on a lack of science and more importantly, understanding (on his part).Originally posted by: Riprorin
Originally posted by: TuxDave
Originally posted by: Riprorin
Should I have wished that he believe in a false god?
Why not? That's the same God that you're worshipping.
ZING!!! OK ok..I take that back.
Getting back to the topic, what do you think about a renouned scholar who's been a leading advocate for atheism for 50 years acknowledging, based on science, that some sort of intelligence or first cause must have created the universe?
Originally posted by: Riprorin
Getting back to the topic, what do you think about a renouned scholar who's been a leading advocate for atheism for 50 years acknowledging, based on science, that some sort of intelligence or first cause must have created the universe?
Originally posted by: TuxDave
Originally posted by: kranky
Oh, I don't know, maybe how rare it is for someone well known in a field to do a 180 on the positions that he held and lectured on for decades, how difficult it would be for anyone in that position to publicly declare their new theory.. you know, stuff like that.
Welcome to science. I agree, it must've been difficult to provide a different theory than what he was so familiar with. However, if you want to be a good scientist, you need to set aside your pride and make judgements on the data alone. Apparantly he saw good reason to revise his theory and I commend him for following the scientific tradition.
Finally, he's not the only one to take a second look at his theories.
http://www.space.com/news/hawking_bet_040716.html
That quote is actually quite refreshing, and I agree 100% with him.Originally posted by: LordMorpheus
Originally posted by: Mo0o
OMG THANKS FOR THE INFO IM GOING TO BE CHRISTIAN NOW
PS. overbearing christians like you make me glad to be agnostic
Flew said he's best labeled a deist like Thomas Jefferson, whose God was not actively involved in people's lives.
"I'm thinking of a God very different from the God of the Christian and far and away from the God of Islam, because both are depicted as omnipotent Oriental despots, cosmic Saddam Husseins," he said. "It could be a person in the sense of a being that has intelligence and a purpose, I suppose."
Good job reading. I mean, comeon, its only about 10 lines in.
if you can't be bothered to read the post, DON'T FVCKING REPLY!
That's what the dictionary refers to as nihilism - nothing is true or false. It's a view that an atheist can subscribe toDoes that make either one of your viewpoints any less valid? No. Does it make either of you a better or worse person? No.
It's up to you how you live your life; whether you're a happy person or not.
What's good, and what is not? Why "should" a person do it, if not to answer to a higher power?You should strive to be a good person regardless of what you believe in.
I agree, it's scary the idea of burning in hell. It's not fun to think about, but you must realize that followers of a religion believe that this it the very real possibility.You shouldn't need scare tactics condemning you to Hell to cause you to live life "correctly".
It can be, but to others it's a source of inspiration. You can find any number of people who've used religion to get themselves through hard times. Is this human psychology cheating itself from the truth, to make a situation feel better, or is it a true indication of God?Religion is a crutch.
Originally posted by: Skoorb
That's what the dictionary refers to as nihilism - nothing is true or false. It's a view that an atheist can subscribe toDoes that make either one of your viewpoints any less valid? No. Does it make either of you a better or worse person? No.
It's up to you how you live your life; whether you're a happy person or not.What's good, and what is not? Why "should" a person do it, if not to answer to a higher power?You should strive to be a good person regardless of what you believe in.I agree, it's scary the idea of burning in hell. It's not fun to think about, but you must realize that followers of a religion believe that this it the very real possibility.You shouldn't need scare tactics condemning you to Hell to cause you to live life "correctly".It can be, but to others it's a source of inspiration. You can find any number of people who've used religion to get themselves through hard times. Is this human psychology cheating itself from the truth, to make a situation feel better, or is it a true indication of God?Religion is a crutch.
Any time I post in these religion threads, which is rare because they are almost invariably full of idiocy on ALL sides (and are impossible to get into a discussion about without people pissing on each other) I keep my own beliefs pretty much out of the mix, but I will say that in the past few years I've done a semi-typical approach of a) I believe what my parents told me to believe, b) I rebelled, grew up, went to a liberal university, mocked all non-science, c) took another look at it. As I mentioned above science simply cannot by its very nature/definition explain where we came from. When all else fails I'll go back to it, but it's a tool, it's not a philosophy. You don't use a ratchet to paint a picture, or a paint brush to change spark plugs. Science is merely a tool. A mistake people make is thinking that it's a skeleton key for access to all questions in the universe and I just don't see why we give it such "faith". It hasn't shown that it can be that key, and it doesn't even claim that it can be.
Proponents of science cannot even _theorize_ the beginning of time/universe, let alone prove it. Science simply doesn't allow for the introduction of something (us, universe, etc.) from nothing. What came before it, and what started it? For me this is the question that continues to befuddle, and more than anything else lends to the legitimate idea that there is something else.
Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Famous atheist? I've never heard of the guy.
Besides, at 81, senility is probably starting to set in
I wouldn't take it that far, I don't really believe nothing is true or false, I just believe that it is up to you whether you lead a happy, fulfilling life or not.Originally posted by: Skoorb
That's what the dictionary refers to as nihilism - nothing is true or false. It's a view that an atheist can subscribe to
Very good question that I'm not entirely sure how to answer. "Goodness" should be taught regardless of religion. It should include such basic things as "do to others as you want done to you". Very good universal rule.What's good, and what is not? Why "should" a person do it, if not to answer to a higher power?
Yes, of course.. but I still condend that you shouldn't need to be scared into being a good person.I agree, it's scary the idea of burning in hell. It's not fun to think about, but you must realize that followers of a religion believe that this it the very real possibility.
Yes, I agree.. it can be a source of inspiration, and in that respect it is not necessarily bad, but I still view it as a crutch. Why can't this person have inspiration and hope on their own? I do. I'm forever looking at *everything* positivly.It can be, but to others it's a source of inspiration. You can find any number of people who've used religion to get themselves through hard times. Is this human psychology cheating itself from the truth, to make a situation feel better, or is it a true indication of God?
I agree.Any time I post in these religion threads, which is rare because they are almost invariably full of idiocy on ALL sides (and are impossible to get into a discussion about without people pissing on each other) I keep my own beliefs pretty much out of the mix, but I will say that in the past few years I've done a semi-typical approach of a) I believe what my parents told me to believe, b) I rebelled, grew up, went to a liberal university, mocked all non-science, c) took another look at it. As I mentioned above science simply cannot by its very nature/definition explain where we came from. When all else fails I'll go back to it, but it's a tool, it's not a philosophy. You don't use a ratchet to paint a picture, or a paint brush to change spark plugs. Science is merely a tool. A mistake people make is thinking that it's a skeleton key for access to all questions in the universe and I just don't see why we give it such "faith". It hasn't shown that it can be that key, and it doesn't even claim that it can be.
Proponents of science cannot even _theorize_ the beginning of time/universe, let alone prove it. Science simply doesn't allow for the introduction of something (us, universe, etc.) from nothing. What came before it, and what started it? For me this is the question that continues to befuddle, and more than anything else lends to the legitimate idea that there is something else.
Originally posted by: Skoorb
There is something to be said for that. I've yet to hear of a scientific explanation for the beginning of time/universe. People say "big bang", but where did that mass come from? What caused it to bang? No matter how far you go back science is inherently unable, due to its cause and effect nature, to explain how the universe could have begun.Antony Flew has concluded that some sort of intelligence or first cause must have created the universe. A super-intelligence is the only good explanation for the origin of life and the complexity of nature,