Science vs Religion

[Shogun]

So what convinces you that there IS a God ?

 

Or is it just habit?

Its not a case of convincing or a habbit its a belief I don't need no convincing its a belief, Its a very hard thing to just dismiss the belief in something that was a large part of my upbringing, my belief in god has never diminished but like I said some of the story's are a bit hard to believe and the more you understand about science the harder it is to believe some of the stories.

[janie48]

That's 2 threads in one day that palirichard's thrown his dummy out of. Is that a record I wonder? Can't be, I'm sure Grahame holds the record for that.

 

Its true that Palirichard's could have chosen a more diplomatic introduction,but at least the thread got going didn't it? So don't get carried away,just give the man a break. At least he's an atheist like yourself.

[MrSmith]

Its not a case of convincing or a habbit its a belief I don't need no convincing its a belief, Its a very hard thing to just dismiss the belief in something that was a large part of my upbringing, my belief in god has never diminished but like I said some of the story's are a bit hard to believe and the more you understand about science the harder it is to believe some of the stories.

 

I went the other way, I never believed in God but I did believe many of the stories although in an embellished form and many can be proven to be possible without the need for a God.

[six45ive]

Its true that Palirichard's could have chosen a more diplomatic introduction,but at least the thread got going didn't it? So don't get carried away,just give the man a break. At least he's an atheist like yourself.

 

I'm afraid I get a little frustrated at the dishonesty/hypocrisy of somebody who tries to justify two completely incompatible philosophical positions at the same time. Can't stand hypocrisy.

[janie48]

[quote=six45ive;8546847. Can't stand hypocrisy.

 

Well at least thats ONE thing we have in common.

[RootsBooster]

Its not a case of convincing or a habbit its a belief I don't need no convincing its a belief, Its a very hard thing to just dismiss the belief in something that was a large part of my upbringing, my belief in god has never diminished but like I said some of the story's are a bit hard to believe and the more you understand about science the harder it is to believe some of the stories.

 

No disrespect meant, but what you are describing does sound very much like habit (for want of a better word);

 

-You have been told something since childhood and believed it without question

 

-As you got older you realised some of the stories don't make sense and are hard to believe

 

-You still believe anyway, without explanation

 

 

Perhaps I should have phrased my question a little differently...

So what convinces you that there IS a God ?

Why do you believe there IS a God, now that you realise you just accepted what you were told from childhood, and admit that it doesn't all make sense?

[flamingjimmy]

Its true that Palirichard's could have chosen a more diplomatic introduction,but at least the thread got going didn't it? So don't get carried away,just give the man a break. At least he's an atheist like yourself.

 

tbh I'm not even sure that he is, I think he might be someone's sockpuppet.

[Karis]

And you don't have to reply to the thread, I wasn't trying to dictate I was trying to lay down some ground rules to stop this thread turning into 'us against them'.

 

I suppose naively thinking I would get balanced views is a bit silly of me, ah well, let the unfounded 'proof' begin. I can't really be bothered to be honest if that's the way this forum wants to play it that's fair enough. I'll go elsewhere.

 

Are you honestly joking with this? Did you not do a search first (which any reasoned scientist would do) to see the literally tens of thousands of posts by hundreds of posters on this very issue on Sheffield Forum!

 

I see one of these posts because it's been done to death and, apart from semantics, there is nothing to be gained for, as history will show, science and religion are mutually exclusive; it's almost always one or the other.

 

So this whole thread has no merit as while there's an overwhelming amount of evidence to support science, there is - and it needs saying - absolutely no evidence or any - and I mean not a scrap or even the tiniest fragment of proof - to suggest that any divine being exists.

 

There's no mathematical symbol for god, and for very good reason.

[Vague_Boy]

Since the universe is everything that exists and it is infinitely unlikely that everything that exists popped into existence from nothing

The Bang Bang theory does not say that the universe "popped" into existence from "nothing".

 

the Big Bang theory cannot and does not provide any explanation for such an initial condition; rather, it describes and explains the general evolution of the universe going forward from that point on

LINK

 

 

Would anyone care to explain the expanding universe (measured using observations of the red shift of distant stars), indicating that the universe was once concentrated into a single point 13.7 billion years ago?

 

Or how about the existence of cosmic microwave background radiation as a substantiation of the Big Bang Theory?

 

Or shall we just say the Sky Fairy did it?

[MrSmith]

The Bang Bang theory does not say that the universe "popped" into existence from "nothing".

 

 

LINK

 

 

Would anyone care to explain the expanding universe (measured using observations of the red shift of distant stars), indicating that the universe was once concentrated into a single point 13.7 billion years ago?

 

Or how about the existence of cosmic microwave background radiation as a substantiation of the Big Bang Theory?

 

Or shall we just say the Sky Fairy did it?

 

I know that, I’m trying to find out why HeadingNorth thinks it did pop into existence from nothing, unless we have somehow got our wires crossed and he doesn’t think it did expanded from nothing.

The expanding universe, what we know from observations is that it is expanding; we don’t know that it has expanded from a single point or that it has always expanded, we don’t know if it contracted before it expanded. If the universe contracted prior to the expansion it would have become very hot and very dense giving the exact conditions that physicists say was the start of the big bank which also isn’t fact, the big bang is still just a theory and has its own problems. Then there’s the possibility that the infinite universe could be contracting and expanding at the same time.

 

 

 

I assume the vacuum of space is part of the universe and is infinite; I have no reason to assume it has an end or a beginning. The vacuum isn’t nothing, it exists and if the big bang happened it came from the vacuum and if the vacuum can produce one big bang it can produce infinite big bangs.