Will science ever wipe out organized religion?

[6000SUX]

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: 6000SUX

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: 6000SUX

Originally posted by: BigJ
Your example with the question of "Why I am going to store" is simply answered because it implies an understanding of the events leading up to the situation. The question of "why we exist" and having evolution as an answer would imply that we understand all the events starting from the beginning up until evolution. This is simply not the case.

And another: when you go to the store, this also occurs as part of the chain of events starting with/just before the Big Bang. By your standards, to answer the question of why you went to the store, because we have an imperfect understanding of the origins of the cosmos, you would be forced to answer, "I don't really know." And that would be the only correct answer to every such question asked by anyone, in your world.

I knew you were going to bring this up. Very predictable. I should've answered it in the original post, but oh well. The difference is, going back to the BB is not fundamentally important to understand why I'm going to the store. To understand why we exist, it is fundamentally important to understand the entire process of creation. Evolution would be the correct answer to why if the question asked was "why do we exist in the universe itself," implying that the creation of the universe (the start of the chain) is not fundamentally important.

And in the same way, going back to the BB is not fundamentally important to understand why we exist. The movement of large amounts of plasma etc. does not really have much to do with the human condition or how the human race arose. The human race arose a good deal of time after the Big Bang, as well. I can as easily and truly argue that to understand why you went to the store, it is fundamentally important to understand the entire cosmology of the universe.

We cannot exist anywhere but in the universe.

If it were so predictable you would not have slipped up.

Actually it was that predictable, I just didn't feel like addressing it.

You admit that the universe is a fundamental part of our existence in the universe. Since we cannot exist anywhere but in the universe, it is fundamentally part of why we exist.

That's not the same as saying that we must inquire into the Big Bang to answer "Why does the human race exist?" One is a question of biology on a small scale, removed billions of years from the titanic forces which created the entire universe. Again, by your standard we have to answer "How did the universe originate?" to answer every question pertaining to anything in the universe. All I can say is, you are alone... People don't inquire into Big Bang theory when they ask each other smaller or different questions.

And I would argue that the activity of the universe before we existed is a large and fundamental part of how we exist in our current form.

You could say that about anything. It's not useful. You have been reduced to this by the bad start in your original argument.

 

[tealk]

"Activity happened".....LOL.....That's called God made it happen. Big Bang = GOD!

 

[6000SUX]

Originally posted by: BigJ
Sure the universe existed without us. This doesn't change the fact that in our current incarnation, it seems we need the universe to exist.

And just talking about the Big Bang is of course not the whole picture. But it is definitely part of it, aka part of why we exist.

So when you said that answering the question of why the Big Bang occurred would answer why we exist, you were wrong. It doesn't. Also, everything "needs the universe to exist". We are now far from discussing the origin of human life, thanks to your bad argument.

When we discuss the origin of human life, we should actually discuss the original and events leading up to it. Billions of years and light-years away just doesn't cut it. Huge balls of plasma have nothing directly or proximately to do with the biological origins of life on this planet, let alone with our origins. It is a specious argument to bring up the Big Bang just because it precedes everything else.

 

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: 6000SUX

Originally posted by: BigJ
Sure the universe existed without us. This doesn't change the fact that in our current incarnation, it seems we need the universe to exist.

And just talking about the Big Bang is of course not the whole picture. But it is definitely part of it, aka part of why we exist.

So when you said that answering the question of why the Big Bang occurred would answer why we exist, you were wrong. It doesn't. Also, everything "needs the universe to exist". We are now far from discussing the origin of human life, thanks to your bad argument.

When we discuss the origin of human life, we should actually discuss the original and events leading up to it. Billions of years and light-years away just doesn't cut it. Huge balls of plasma have nothing directly or proximately to do with the biological origins of life on this planet, let alone with our origins. It is a specious argument to bring up the Big Bang just because it precedes everything else.

::sigh::

I already addressed the point you bring up about the BB. My direct quote was as follows:

And finding the cause of the Big Bang would indeed explain how it came about, but it would in no way explain why the cause of the Big Bang occurred. The Big Bang was specifically used because it's our best guess at a starting point of the chain so far.

Which would imply that eventually, the BB will no longer be the starting point of the chain. Nice try though.

As far as discussing the universe shaping human life, yes if something had happened differently human origins could and would've been much different, if we would've existed at all.

 

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: 6000SUX

That's not the same as saying that we must inquire into the Big Bang to answer "Why does the human race exist?" One is a question of biology on a small scale, removed billions of years from the titanic forces which created the entire universe. Again, by your standard we have to answer "How did the universe originate?" to answer every question pertaining to anything in the universe. All I can say is, you are alone... People don't inquire into Big Bang theory when they ask each other smaller or different questions.

And I would argue that the activity of the universe before we existed is a large and fundamental part of how we exist in our current form.

You could say that about anything. It's not useful. You have been reduced to this by the bad start in your original argument.

Like I said before, you're simply choosing to ignore the larger picture. Evolution explains the why on a smaller scale. It really is that simple. Why we exist is a broad, encompassing question. Why we exist based on the activity and events that occurred in the universe is evolution.

 

[6000SUX]

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: 6000SUX

Originally posted by: BigJ
Sure the universe existed without us. This doesn't change the fact that in our current incarnation, it seems we need the universe to exist.

And just talking about the Big Bang is of course not the whole picture. But it is definitely part of it, aka part of why we exist.

So when you said that answering the question of why the Big Bang occurred would answer why we exist, you were wrong. It doesn't. Also, everything "needs the universe to exist". We are now far from discussing the origin of human life, thanks to your bad argument.

When we discuss the origin of human life, we should actually discuss the original and events leading up to it. Billions of years and light-years away just doesn't cut it. Huge balls of plasma have nothing directly or proximately to do with the biological origins of life on this planet, let alone with our origins. It is a specious argument to bring up the Big Bang just because it precedes everything else.

::sigh::

I already addressed the point you bring up about the BB. My direct quote was as follows:

And finding the cause of the Big Bang would indeed explain how it came about, but it would in no way explain why the cause of the Big Bang occurred. The Big Bang was specifically used because it's our best guess at a starting point of the chain so far.

Which would imply that eventually, the BB will no longer be the starting point of the chain. Nice try though.

As far as discussing the universe shaping human life, yes if something had happened differently human origins could and would've been much different, if we would've existed at all.

My point isn't that the BB isn't early enough, it's that it's far too early. Courses on anthropology and biology never, ever discuss the Big Bang. So although it may be convenient for you to think this way, the rest of the world does not.

 

[6000SUX]

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: 6000SUX

That's not the same as saying that we must inquire into the Big Bang to answer "Why does the human race exist?" One is a question of biology on a small scale, removed billions of years from the titanic forces which created the entire universe. Again, by your standard we have to answer "How did the universe originate?" to answer every question pertaining to anything in the universe. All I can say is, you are alone... People don't inquire into Big Bang theory when they ask each other smaller or different questions.

And I would argue that the activity of the universe before we existed is a large and fundamental part of how we exist in our current form.

You could say that about anything. It's not useful. You have been reduced to this by the bad start in your original argument.

Like I said before, you're simply choosing to ignore the larger picture. Evolution explains the why on a smaller scale. It really is that simple. Why we exist is a broad, encompassing question. Why we exist based on the activity and events that occurred in the universe is evolution.

The only possible interest that cosmogony in this context is to someone attempting to introduce a supernatural creator into the mix.

 

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: 6000SUX
My point isn't that the BB isn't early enough, it's that it's far too early. Courses on anthropology and biology never, ever discuss the Big Bang. So although it may be convenient for you to think this way, the rest of the world does not.

You still aren't getting it. Anthropology and biology look at the how, not the why. I don't understand why you can't see this simple difference. The question of "why" we exist is considered an unanswerable question by science in it's current form. Maybe one day we'll be able to scientifically understand the formation of the universe and why humans exist, but that day isn't here yet.

Originally posted by: 6000SUX
The only possible interest that cosmogony in this context is to someone attempting to introduce a supernatural creator into the mix.

No, that's your hatred towards religion blinding you. Whether we like or not, things had to start somehow. Somehow, some way, whether it's out of nothingness, or simply something we can't understand right now due to lack of scientific advancement and understanding, there was an origin of the universe. Why does it have to be a supernatural creator?

Maybe if you can get past the difference between why and how, we can continue this conversation, but it's pointless until you do.

 

[sao123]

as long as people die, there will be organized religion...
so to answer the question... science would have to make people live forever.

 

[3NF]

6000SUX - do you sleep?

 

[tealk]

One day you'll stand before God on Judgement day, and he will look at you and say "what now, you were told over and over who I am, Alpha and the Omega" And you'll have a blank stare on your face in amazement. After that.....well.....will be pretty sad.

May the Lord speak to you all and plant that seed of hope and forgiveness, and Grace in this world.

 

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: tealk
One day you'll stand before God on Judgement day, and he will look at you and say "what now, you were told over and over who I am, Alpha and the Omega" And you'll have a blank stare on your face in amazement. After that.....well.....will be pretty sad.

May the Lord speak to you all and plant that seed of hope and forgiveness, and Grace in this world.

If there turns out to be the God, I just hope he's not that big of an arse about things.

 

[3NF]

Originally posted by: tealk
One day you'll stand before God on Judgement day, and he will look at you and say "what now, you were told over and over who I am, Alpha and the Omega" And you'll have a blank stare on your face in amazement. After that.....well.....will be pretty sad.

May the Lord speak to you all and plant that seed of hope and forgiveness, and Grace in this world.

If that happens, then my response to him will be "You're an asshole." Why should I believe anyone that says he's the Alpha and Omega? Why can't he get off his lazy ass and just tell everyone outright?

 

[tealk]

One word...Faith

 

[3NF]

Originally posted by: tealk
One word...Faith

OK, I'm going to write a book about "God" - my interpretation. All I ask is that everyone have Faith in what I believe. It will be the truth - really.

 

[6000SUX]

Originally posted by: tealk
One day you'll stand before God on Judgement day, and he will look at you and say "what now, you were told over and over who I am, Alpha and the Omega" And you'll have a blank stare on your face in amazement. After that.....well.....will be pretty sad.

May the Lord speak to you all and plant that seed of hope and forgiveness, and Grace in this world.

Please explain why I should believe your version over any of the scads of religions out there, each with their own holy documents.

 

[6000SUX]

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: 6000SUX
My point isn't that the BB isn't early enough, it's that it's far too early. Courses on anthropology and biology never, ever discuss the Big Bang. So although it may be convenient for you to think this way, the rest of the world does not.

You still aren't getting it. Anthropology and biology look at the how, not the why. I don't understand why you can't see this simple difference. The question of "why" we exist is considered an unanswerable question by science in it's current form. Maybe one day we'll be able to scientifically understand the formation of the universe and why humans exist, but that day isn't here yet.

Originally posted by: 6000SUX
The only possible interest that cosmogony in this context is to someone attempting to introduce a supernatural creator into the mix.

No, that's your hatred towards religion blinding you. Whether we like or not, things had to start somehow. Somehow, some way, whether it's out of nothingness, or simply something we can't understand right now due to lack of scientific advancement and understanding, there was an origin of the universe. Why does it have to be a supernatural creator?

Maybe if you can get past the difference between why and how, we can continue this conversation, but it's pointless until you do.

You're still not getting it. Anthropology and in fact all the sciences look at the why just as much as the how. I have no hatred towards religion, just dislike of religious people that argue points badly on the web. The question of why we exist is considered by you to be unanswerable. Without knowing all the details, we already have many answers, including the chief one: evolution. It is not the answer to why the universe came about, but, together with a particular set of circumstances, the answer to why we came about.

 

[tealk]

I pray for both of you.

Grant them forgiveness Lord for they know not what they say.

 

[MiniDoom]

Originally posted by: tealk
I pray for both of you.

Grant them forgiveness Lord for they know not what they say.

I hope you don't really talk like that, the way the bible reads.

 

[tealk]

It's a prayer, so yes I do.

 

[6000SUX]

Originally posted by: tealk
It's a prayer, so yes I do.

While you're at it, want to stop ignoring me and answer my question?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: 3NF
6000SUX - do you sleep?

Methamphetamine is a hell of a drug.

 

[tealk]

Originally posted by: 6000SUX

Originally posted by: tealk
It's a prayer, so yes I do.

While you're at it, want to stop ignoring me and answer my question?

I not going to answer a question, to get a known response.

An Unbeleiver will not undertstand what the truth is because they are blinded. You have to beleive to start to understand....goes back to faith....have faith...and it will be shown onto you.

Your next statement might be, well ok then I beleive.....but dont kid yourself....you cannot lie to Jesus our God.

 

[6000SUX]

Originally posted by: tealk

Originally posted by: 6000SUX

Originally posted by: tealk
It's a prayer, so yes I do.

While you're at it, want to stop ignoring me and answer my question?

I not going to answer a question, to get a known response.

An Unbeleiver will not undertstand what the truth is because they are blinded. You have to beleive to start to understand....goes back to faith....have faith...and it will be sown onto you.

You next statement might be, well ok then I beleive.....but dont kid yourself....you cannot lie to Jesus our God.

You're not doing a very good job. Don't you have a duty to convert the nonfaithful? Why not answer my question, anyway? You're being very rude, and I don't think your religion encourages that.

My question is simple: how could I possibly start to believe in your particular religion instead of all the others out there? What makes it inherently so much better? Because I can tell you, from the outside looking in, they are similar in a lot of respects. You have a holy book, they have theirs. So tell me, how am I supposed to believe in the Alpha and the Omega or whatever in the face of equally strong words from advocates of other religions?

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: 6000SUX

Originally posted by: tealk

Originally posted by: 6000SUX

Originally posted by: tealk
It's a prayer, so yes I do.

While you're at it, want to stop ignoring me and answer my question?

I not going to answer a question, to get a known response.

An Unbeleiver will not undertstand what the truth is because they are blinded. You have to beleive to start to understand....goes back to faith....have faith...and it will be sown onto you.

You next statement might be, well ok then I beleive.....but dont kid yourself....you cannot lie to Jesus our God.

You're not doing a very good job. Don't you have a duty to convert the nonfaithful? Why not answer my question, anyway? You're being very rude, and I don't think your religion encourages that.

My question is simple: how could I possibly start to believe in your particular religion instead of all the others out there? What makes it inherently so much better? Because I can tell you, from the outside looking in, they are similar in a lot of respects. You have a holy book, they have theirs. So tell me, how am I supposed to believe in the Alpha and the Omega or whatever in the face of equally strong words from advocates of other religions?

He can't answer your questions because he doesn't have the answers. I love it when people come to my door...Mormon's, Jehova's Witnesse's, et al...they can never the answer the questions I have about their faith--b/c they are kept ignorant, or b/c those answers don't exist.

He won't admit that he doesn't understand the theology as well as he would like to. "Because I have faith" is a blanket answer to fall back onto, that doesn't really answer anything.

But again...the debate itself is irrational. His truth system is based in faith; your's is in logic--why bother?