Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Truth is independent of time. Accordingly, any religion whose core beliefs changed with time could not be a true religion. While the subtleties of a religion might change with time, the essence cannot. I feel incredibly sorry for the tens of millions who think that the world as we know it occurred simply by chance.
The utility of organized religion is readily seen by considering religion as a practice. A practice is an ethical construction requiring (among other things) interaction with others to ensure that incorrect notions or actions are avoided, as no one person can hope to construct everything that is right and wrong on his/her own in a single lifetime. Nor can one be sure that what he perceives is right is truly right without this interaction (though I'm sure Moonbeam will disagree with me here, though I know that this is true at least of myself). Multiple perspectives always lead to a clearer picture of the truth, just as you require multiple points to triangulate a position using radar. You just don't have enough information from where you sit.
Things are not myth simply because you declare them as such. Some things are true, whether or not you believe in them. You simply select the scientific data that you deem supportive of your position and attempt to use it to disqualify a large section of organized religions (read: fundamentalists). Not all organized religions are fundamentalist in nature, though you seek to paint them all in this way.I'm just at odds here trying to figure out why so many people put so much importance in these thousand year old myths, over things like proven scientific data. I'm not trying to flame or attack any religion, I'm just trying to understand. The more I hear these arguments about things like the attack on Christmas, the more I feel like our country is headed in the completely wrong direction.
For me, I see nature as the scientific data in favor of a deity. The innate complexity and order of nature becomes more and more apparent the more and more I study it. I see these things and speculate that the probability of it all happening simply by chance is infinitesimal at best, less than zero at worst. The miracles that I have seen, heard of, read about, and felt are perhaps more important data in this search.
I sincerely doubt you want to quibble over the finer points of entropy with me, as your own example demonstrates that you don't really understand them. Instead, it's just your diversion to avoid the real issues that I laid out in great detail. Try to make yourself sound smart and me sound dumb rather than addressing any of the points. Anyway, I'm not going for it. I'm confident in my knowledge of the subject and won't dally trying to educate you on it.Originally posted by: Future Shock
This shens is possibly the worst arguement for the non-evoloution crowd. Tell ya what Cyclo - take a warm mug of hot water, dissolve some sugar into it...and place a string handing down into the center of it. WOW! Orderly, symmetrical CRYSTALS will start growing onto the string!!! Perfectly formed, for a solid previously in random, Brownian motion in the water. ORDER - from disorder. And no intervention from you, or god, or anything else...(in fact, forming a supersaturated solution, in which crystals do not form, is actually much harder...)
So, the laws of conservation of mass and energy don't apply to large systems? Go back to high school before you try to lecture me on science.strange, most of the things i observe so the opposite. As with physics, the rules that govern the small don't really work for the large.
How do you know that they never happened? Your governing axiom is nothing but a wanton assumption that suits your desired outcome, also known as begging the question.Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
Cyclo I think you got my words confused a bit. When I speak about the Bible and the Quran as being myths, I am being very specific. I am strictly referring to the things like Jesus walking on water, the parting of the Red Sea, etc. We know none of those things happened, and if they did it was not for the reasons that are stated in the Bible.
But... the Ten Commandments are a myth - a fabrication made up by man! How can they possibly be beneficial?Ten Commandments + Golden Rule is all the moral guidance you'll ever need.
For the zillionth time, there is a difference between legislating ethics and legislating religion. Certain things are right and certain things are wrong, independent of your religious frame of reference, personal beliefs, or any other factor. The purpose of ethical study is to determine what these issues are. Accordingly, I am very much in support of legislating ethics. I am heavily opposed to legislating religion/religious morality, which is very much distinct from ethics.Originally posted by: Tab
As you know CycloWizard you've had many debates amoung the topic of gay-marriage and abortion of sorts. I think the vast majority of people don't have a problem with Christianity being expressed and not forced amoung others.
That's because you don't know what fundamentalism is. For your convenience, I will repeat again that fundamentalism is the belief that a religious text must be interpreted in a strictly literal sense as the direct, divine word of God. I do not believe this at all. Thus, my 'reak'ing of fundamentalism is merely your lack of understanding of what fundamentalism actually is.I am curious though, you don't seem to consider yourself a fundamentalist. What kind of indiviuals do you consider to be fundamentalists? What seperates the fundamentalists from yourself? No offense, I don't want this thread to degenerate into a flame war, but you're previous posts reak of Christian Fundamentalism.
Originally posted by: CycloWizard
For the zillionth time, there is a difference between legislating ethics and legislating religion. Certain things are right and certain things are wrong, independent of your religious frame of reference, personal beliefs, or any other factor. The purpose of ethical study is to determine what these issues are. Accordingly, I am very much in support of legislating ethics. I am heavily opposed to legislating religion/religious morality, which is very much distinct from ethics.
Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
Maybe it has been a gradual awakening or revelation that has occured throughout the years, but lately I just can't help but notice how incredibly stupid people get about religion. I'm also realizing how modern religion simply does not hold up to my own standards anymore, and my view of most mainstream religions is that they are nothing more than mythology. I feel incredibly sorry for the tens of millions of people who are hoodwinked and indoctrinated into these religions which are based upon thousand year old texts who accuracy can never be determined.
I wonder how and why religion has been left largely unevolved. It seems to me that religion would have to adapt to the culture and times in order to stay relevant in people's lives. However, it seems like it is doing precisely the opposite. People cling to these mythological beliefs, while thumbing their noses at proven scientific data that has been the fruitless efforts of thousands of scientists.
What the hell is the point of even having an organized religion anymore? If your faith is your personal relationship between yourself and whatever you believe to be God(s), then why do you need other people telling you what to believe?
I'm just at odds here trying to figure out why so many people put so much importance in these thousand year old myths, over things like proven scientific data. I'm not trying to flame or attack any religion, I'm just trying to understand. The more I hear these arguments about things like the attack on Christmas, the more I feel like our country is headed in the completely wrong direction.
Originally posted by: CycloWizard
I sincerely doubt you want to quibble over the finer points of entropy with me, as your own example demonstrates that you don't really understand them. Instead, it's just your diversion to avoid the real issues that I laid out in great detail. Try to make yourself sound smart and me sound dumb rather than addressing any of the points. Anyway, I'm not going for it. I'm confident in my knowledge of the subject and won't dally trying to educate you on it.Originally posted by: Future Shock
This shens is possibly the worst arguement for the non-evoloution crowd. Tell ya what Cyclo - take a warm mug of hot water, dissolve some sugar into it...and place a string handing down into the center of it. WOW! Orderly, symmetrical CRYSTALS will start growing onto the string!!! Perfectly formed, for a solid previously in random, Brownian motion in the water. ORDER - from disorder. And no intervention from you, or god, or anything else...(in fact, forming a supersaturated solution, in which crystals do not form, is actually much harder...)
So, the laws of conservation of mass and energy don't apply to large systems? Go back to high school before you try to lecture me on science.strange, most of the things i observe so the opposite. As with physics, the rules that govern the small don't really work for the large.
How do you know that they never happened? Your governing axiom is nothing but a wanton assumption that suits your desired outcome, also known as begging the question.Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
Cyclo I think you got my words confused a bit. When I speak about the Bible and the Quran as being myths, I am being very specific. I am strictly referring to the things like Jesus walking on water, the parting of the Red Sea, etc. We know none of those things happened, and if they did it was not for the reasons that are stated in the Bible.
But... the Ten Commandments are a myth - a fabrication made up by man! How can they possibly be beneficial?Ten Commandments + Golden Rule is all the moral guidance you'll ever need.
For the zillionth time, there is a difference between legislating ethics and legislating religion. Certain things are right and certain things are wrong, independent of your religious frame of reference, personal beliefs, or any other factor. The purpose of ethical study is to determine what these issues are. Accordingly, I am very much in support of legislating ethics. I am heavily opposed to legislating religion/religious morality, which is very much distinct from ethics.Originally posted by: Tab
As you know CycloWizard you've had many debates amoung the topic of gay-marriage and abortion of sorts. I think the vast majority of people don't have a problem with Christianity being expressed and not forced amoung others.
That's because you don't know what fundamentalism is. For your convenience, I will repeat again that fundamentalism is the belief that a religious text must be interpreted in a strictly literal sense as the direct, divine word of God. I do not believe this at all. Thus, my 'reak'ing of fundamentalism is merely your lack of understanding of what fundamentalism actually is.I am curious though, you don't seem to consider yourself a fundamentalist. What kind of indiviuals do you consider to be fundamentalists? What seperates the fundamentalists from yourself? No offense, I don't want this thread to degenerate into a flame war, but you're previous posts reak of Christian Fundamentalism.
Um, no. Certain things are right and certain things are wrong. A cursory study of ethics can lead you to this conclusion, since absolute ethical relativism is founded only on fallacy, as is readily demonstrated in any introductory philosophy class. You'll note that I did not say that all things are either right or wrong, only that some things are either right or wrong.Originally posted by: Meuge
Really now?
You believe in absolute 'right' and 'wrong'? That's only possible if you base your ethics on a point source (here, it's obviously religion).
As soon as you recognize that you're not all-knowing, we can have a legitimate conversation without your condescension. Your arrogance is astounding, particularly in light of your ignorance.Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
The message of the Bible is within the stories it tells, and I think anyone with half a brain knows that almost all of the stories are largely untrue or at least wildly distorted. The point of the stories is not their accuracy, but the message behind them. The Bible/Quran/whatever holy book you got is nothing more than a guide to live your life better. It was not written by God, guided by God, or anything of the sort. It was written by man, there is nothing powerful or sacred about it. I think once you understand that, and realize that you've been deceived your entire life into putting so much power and faith into a book, then you can really begin your own path of spirituality.
:thumbsup:Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
The message of the Bible is within the stories it tells, and I think anyone with half a brain knows that almost all of the stories are largely untrue or at least wildly distorted. The point of the stories is not their accuracy, but the message behind them. The Bible/Quran/whatever holy book you got is nothing more than a guide to live your life better. It was not written by God, guided by God, or anything of the sort. It was written by man, there is nothing powerful or sacred about it. I think once you understand that, and realize that you've been deceived your entire life into putting so much power and faith into a book, then you can really begin your own path of spirituality.
Originally posted by: Future Shock
ROTFLMFAO!!! - I have tears in my eyes, honestly...
FS
Originally posted by: CycloWizard
I sincerely doubt you want to quibble over the finer points of entropy with me, as your own example demonstrates that you don't really understand them. Instead, it's just your diversion to avoid the real issues that I laid out in great detail. Try to make yourself sound smart and me sound dumb rather than addressing any of the points. Anyway, I'm not going for it. I'm confident in my knowledge of the subject and won't dally trying to educate you on it.Originally posted by: Future Shock
This shens is possibly the worst arguement for the non-evoloution crowd. Tell ya what Cyclo - take a warm mug of hot water, dissolve some sugar into it...and place a string handing down into the center of it. WOW! Orderly, symmetrical CRYSTALS will start growing onto the string!!! Perfectly formed, for a solid previously in random, Brownian motion in the water. ORDER - from disorder. And no intervention from you, or god, or anything else...(in fact, forming a supersaturated solution, in which crystals do not form, is actually much harder...)
Chemical reactions of the sort associated with life are actually something of a commonplace. It may be beyond us to cook them up in a lab, a la Stanley Miller and Harold Urey, but the universe does so readily enough. Lots of molecules in nature get together to form long chains called polymers. Sugers constantly assemble to form starches. Crystals can do a number of lifelike things - replicate, respond to environmental stimuli, take on a patterned complexity. They've never achieved life itself, of course, but they demonstrate repeatedly that complexity is a natural, spontaneous, entirely reliable event. There may or may not be a great deal of life in the universe at large, but there is no shortage of ordered self-assembly, in everything from the trasnfixing symmetry of snowflakes to the comely rings of Saturn.
So powerful in this natural impulse to assemble that many scientists now belive that life may be more inevitable than we think - that is, in the words of the Belgian biochemist and Nobel laureate Christian de Duve, 'an obiligatory manifestation of matter, bound to arise whenever conditions are appropriate.' De Duve thought is likely that such conditions would be encountered perhaps a million times in every galaxy.
Certainly there is nothing terribly exotic in the chemicals that animate us. If you wished to create another living object, whether a goldfish or a head of lettuce or a human being, you would need really only four priciple elements, carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen, plus small amounts of a few others, principally sulphur, phosphorus, calcium and iron. Put these together in three dozen or so combinations to form some sugars, acids adn other basic compounds, and you can build anything that lives. As Dawkins notes: " There is nothing special about the substances from which living things are made. Living things are collections of molecules, like everything else."
Originally posted by: piasabird
How do you think the Isrealites got accross the Red Sea?
What if Moses did part the Red Sea and cross over?
Just because something seems impossible it does not mean it did not happen. Why do so many Isrealites beleive in these miracles?
Regardless of whether you believe in something or not, you have to admit that faith has caused people to be able to do tremendous things. The Romans truly feared the motives of the Jews and the jews wiped out 3 Roman Legions after the death of Jesus. The Romans had to send reinforcements and yes they did kill many people after that.
Look at the American Frontier. Brigham Young helped over 60,000 people to cross the plains and build up the northwest. He is said to be one of the most important forces in the settlement of the NorthWestern part of the United States. Faith Literally Moved Mountains and caused people to work together for a common good. Doubt it if you want to. As for me I believe.
And what objective means exists which can reliably differentiate one from the other?Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Um, no. Certain things are right and certain things are wrong.Originally posted by: Meuge
Really now?
You believe in absolute 'right' and 'wrong'? That's only possible if you base your ethics on a point source (here, it's obviously religion).
I've given ethics more than a cursory study, and yet I still suspect that the "fallacy" of which you speak in regard to ethical subjectivism is really only a product of your misunderstanding. Please, expound on this so-called "fallacy" so that I can evaluate it and decide if my suspicions are well-founded.A cursory study of ethics can lead you to this conclusion, since absolute ethical relativism is founded only on fallacy, as is readily demonstrated in any introductory philosophy class.
Originally posted by: CycloWizard
As soon as you recognize that you're not all-knowing, we can have a legitimate conversation without your condescension. Your arrogance is astounding, particularly in light of your ignorance.Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
The message of the Bible is within the stories it tells, and I think anyone with half a brain knows that almost all of the stories are largely untrue or at least wildly distorted. The point of the stories is not their accuracy, but the message behind them. The Bible/Quran/whatever holy book you got is nothing more than a guide to live your life better. It was not written by God, guided by God, or anything of the sort. It was written by man, there is nothing powerful or sacred about it. I think once you understand that, and realize that you've been deceived your entire life into putting so much power and faith into a book, then you can really begin your own path of spirituality.
Maybe you'd care to come sit in on my thermodynamics lecture next week. The going rate is about $4200 for the class, and I have about 65 students this semester. If you want to shell out the cash, I'll be more than happy to teach you the finer points. If not, then kindly piss off. You're here waxing intellectual regarding things you obviously know very little about, and I have very little time to deal with your idiocy.Originally posted by: Future Shock
Your confidence is your intellectual downfall. Real intellectuals respond on the basis of facts - all you have done is weakly try and malign my style. Poor show, lad.
I've written dozens, maybe hundreds, of posts on these subjects in this forum. You've either ignored or failed to comprehend any of them to this point. I have no reasonable expectation, therefore, of being able to convey my position to you in a single new post, nor do I have the desire to bash my head against the wall for several hundred more posts.Originally posted by: Tab
Speaking of arrogance... :roll:
Ethics do indeed tell us right from wrong, just like religion they are directly related with each other. Apparently, you've misunderstood me. Your thoughts concerning gay-marriage/abortion are identitical to those who are in the "Christian Fundamentalist" group. My question is what seperates you from them?
Please, don't drag this thread down. It's done very well, and I don't apperciate you ruining it.
Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Maybe you'd care to come sit in on my thermodynamics lecture next week. The going rate is about $4200 for the class, and I have about 65 students this semester. If you want to shell out the cash, I'll be more than happy to teach you the finer points. If not, then kindly piss off. You're here waxing intellectual regarding things you obviously know very little about, and I have very little time to deal with your idiocy.Originally posted by: Future Shock
Your confidence is your intellectual downfall. Real intellectuals respond on the basis of facts - all you have done is weakly try and malign my style. Poor show, lad.
Originally posted by: CycloWizard
I've written dozens, maybe hundreds, of posts on these subjects in this forum. You've either ignored or failed to comprehend any of them to this point. I have no reasonable expectation, therefore, of being able to convey my position to you in a single new post, nor do I have the desire to bash my head against the wall for several hundred more posts.Originally posted by: Tab
Speaking of arrogance... :roll:
Ethics do indeed tell us right from wrong, just like religion they are directly related with each other. Apparently, you've misunderstood me. Your thoughts concerning gay-marriage/abortion are identitical to those who are in the "Christian Fundamentalist" group. My question is what seperates you from them?
Please, don't drag this thread down. It's done very well, and I don't apperciate you ruining it.
Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
cyclo if you want to come in here and debate or speak your point of view, i'd suggest you start backing up the things you are talking about. simply stating that your a genius and everyone else is ignorant is well ignorant. for someone as smart as yourself and who is teaching college courses, surely you'd know better how to communicate with others. this isn't how you talk to your students now is it? i don't think i'd be paying $4200 to sit in front of an arrogant arse like yourself.
Originally posted by: CycloWizard
I sincerely doubt you want to quibble over the finer points of entropy with me, as your own example demonstrates that you don't really understand them. Instead, it's just your diversion to avoid the real issues that I laid out in great detail. Try to make yourself sound smart and me sound dumb rather than addressing any of the points. Anyway, I'm not going for it. I'm confident in my knowledge of the subject and won't dally trying to educate you on it.Originally posted by: Future Shock
This shens is possibly the worst arguement for the non-evoloution crowd. Tell ya what Cyclo - take a warm mug of hot water, dissolve some sugar into it...and place a string handing down into the center of it. WOW! Orderly, symmetrical CRYSTALS will start growing onto the string!!! Perfectly formed, for a solid previously in random, Brownian motion in the water. ORDER - from disorder. And no intervention from you, or god, or anything else...(in fact, forming a supersaturated solution, in which crystals do not form, is actually much harder...)
Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Maybe you'd care to come sit in on my thermodynamics lecture next week. The going rate is about $4200 for the class, and I have about 65 students this semester. If you want to shell out the cash, I'll be more than happy to teach you the finer points. If not, then kindly piss off. You're here waxing intellectual regarding things you obviously know very little about, and I have very little time to deal with your idiocy.Originally posted by: Future Shock
Your confidence is your intellectual downfall. Real intellectuals respond on the basis of facts - all you have done is weakly try and malign my style. Poor show, lad.