Jump to content

Science vs Religion


Recommended Posts

Yes he has answered it.

 

I don't think he has answered it. To say I believe in god, isn't saying why I believe in a god. To explain why, I think he'd have to know what god actually is - and what leads him to believe he's actually believing in an existent god and not some invention of his - and other peoples - imagination. What's the difference between his god and an imaginary one?

 

He has stated that he believes,because he has chosen to accept that some of the teachings handed down to him he has accepted.

 

I might accept some of the teachings handed down from Christianity, folklore, superstition, and other fiction. Accepting some of the teachings or meaning behind stories, doesn't mean I believe the protagonists featured are, or were, real. Neither does it mean I believe the events depicted are, or were, real events. Accepting some of the teachings or stories doesn't make me a Christian, a Jedi Knight, or a member of Starship Command.

 

So, why does he believe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes he has answered it. He has stated that he believes,because he has chosen to accept that some of the teachings handed down to him he has accepted.

No he didn't, he never said he believed because of anything. In fact he said he doesn't think he needs a reason, look...

I am a christian ,I have always been a christian, I was brought up as christian,

its my life, its my belief.

do you think there should be a reason, I don't think I need a reason really.

 

Well, personally when it comes to something which is such a big part of people's lives and may influence important decisions, YES I do think there should be a reason, a good one too!

 

But that's just me, I wouldn't push this on anyone. You're basically saying you believe because you just do. That reminds me of Grahame/Agbus's argument that we should think Satan is bad "because he just is".

 

I've never had a reason I've never thought of it that way like I say I don't need a reason I am a believer and that is that, my parents mite have had a big influence on me that may be true,but I can still think for myself.

 

So which way HAVE you thought about it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Folks, I'm back after catching up with latest posts. Sorry I couldn't reply to points made earlier, but if you were in any doubt about my beliefs, let me make it clear - I've been a fundmentalist aetheist since I was about 15, but I'm now a protheist (a sect consisting of 1 person).

 

Protheist? I'm strongly in favour of the idea of God, I just haven't found any evidence that he exists and the faith does not reside in me no matter how hard I search. (I like the idea of aetheism 2.0).

 

I have a strong scientific background, but for me, knowing "the truth" is not enough. The important thing is the meaning we give to that truth.

 

Anthony Robbins talks about "The decisions of destiny".

 

As we go through life, we have to answer 3 questions:

 

1) What happened? (What are the facts? What is the truth?)

2) What does it mean? (How does this relate to our values? How important is it?)

3) What should we do about it? (What actions do we need to take if any, to make progress?)

 

Here's a thought

 

Science is very good at answering question 1

Religion is very good at answering question 2

Politicians usually get to answer question 3

 

What we need is an effective way for society to come together to effectively answer all 3 questions.

 

So rather than trumpeting the victories of science over religion I think we need to get a grip on the fact that life is not just an intellectual pursuit.

 

We may criticise religions for many things, but religion is about more than worshipping a deity. Religions bring friends, families and communities together at the important events in our lives - births, marriages, deaths.

 

The secular world may make attempts to provide alternative ceremonies at these events, but for most people they're not real alternatives to the splendour and gravitas that a religious ceremony provides.

 

One final thought. There is no scientific organisation which goes out in the world to help people in times of natural disaster and war. Scientists don't have an equivalent of the Red Cross or Red Crescent - or is the Red Test Tube a fledgling organisation that I've not come across :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

As we go through life, we have to answer 3 questions:

 

1) What happened? (What are the facts? What is the truth?)

2) What does it mean? (How does this relate to our values? How important is it?)

3) What should we do about it? (What actions do we need to take if any, to make progress?)

 

Here's a thought

 

Science is very good at answering question 1

Religion is very good at answering question 2

Politicians usually get to answer question 3

 

What we need is an effective way for society to come together to effectively answer all 3 questions.

 

Not so surprisingly I answer them for myself with the aid of science for point 1. I don’t need religion or politics to answer any of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not so surprisingly I answer them for myself with the aid of science for point 1. I don’t need religion or politics to answer any of them.

 

Maybe, but my point is that science is not strong in establishing a set of values and actions.

 

As people turn away from religion and become more cynical about politicians they're not turning to scientists to bring society together and lead us to a better future.

 

Sure scientists have made the world a better place by discoveries. But scientists generally leave it to others to do something with the discovery.

 

Science is only part of a bigger picture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe, but my point is that science is not strong in establishing a set of values and actions.

 

As people turn away from religion and become more cynical about politicians they're not turning to scientists to bring society together and lead us to a better future.

 

Sure scientists have made the world a better place by discoveries. But scientists generally leave it to others to do something with the discovery.

 

Science is only part of a bigger picture.

 

I don't think we could ever rely on religion to establish set of values and actions, individuals set their own values.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never heard of him, who is he?

 

Big motivational guru in the states - I've seen him twice at London ExCel. An amazing experience at which I fundamentally re-examined my attitude towards God and re-opened my eyes to look and my ears to listen for his voice. I'll continue to look and listen ...

 

There's a variation of Anthony Robbin's "decisions of destiny" in this vid at 7:50 - but worth watching the lot!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Big motivational guru in the states - I've seen him twice at London ExCel. An amazing experience at which I fundamentally re-examined my attitude towards God and re-opened my eyes to look and my ears to listen for his voice. I'll continue to look and listen ...

 

There's a variation of Anthony Robbin's "decisions of destiny" in this vid at 7:50 - but worth watching the lot!

 

How will you know that what you see and hear is God.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.