Ye Religion Thread

[DaHanG]

What's God going to do when this Universe ends?  Twiddle His thumbs?  Seriously...
Regards,
quadz

   Oh! Oh! I know! I know! I know this one..... Can I answer it?  huh? can I? can I?

Drum roll please..............

The same thing He was doing before it was created!!  Wheeeee!!!!   

duh! what else could he be doing besides that thing.

DHG

[reaper]

science tells us that complex beings come into existence LATE. so to say science works very well with god (a highly complex being that has no evidence) couldn't be further from science. i think you're trying to say that since god solves all problems that science hasn't solved yet, they are compatible. god of the gaps for the win!

regards,

i'm saying science would be working in religions favor.  there's also an enourmous amount of evidence for a god.

[DaHanG]

like?

[QuakeDuke]

If it can't be easily recorded, observed, inferred, or calculated, religious people will invariably blame it on God, instead of looking for a real answer, and in doing so, they majorly handicap their intellectual growth and their general understanding of the universe.
"God" is the lazy-man's answer to the hard questions that are produced by having a modicum of intelligence.

I remember hearing a ruler of a rather large nation saying that religion is the opiate of the people. I also remember rulers of that nation saying their belief system would swallow the rest of the world because god was dead. None of which has come to pass.

Are you truly saying religious people are uneducated morons without a modicum of intelligence?

QD

[reaper]

like?

i guess you don't believe in the holy spirit, to each his own.

[QuakeDuke]

Well let's boot science out the door for a moment.  I'll put on my spiffy religio-hat.    After all, I've made the claim I've had more religious upbringing than any human being should possibly withstand!

quadz, gotta tell ya dude, that hat is wild!! Where can I get one?

All I'm asking is, if God is Infinite, by what leap of logic could it make sense to imagine He would create one finite universe, only?  (Or should I be anticipating at reply that logic and religion don't mix either? )

It doesn't. It would logically follow that god, being infinite, would by his creative nature, create unimaginable numbers of universes populated with unimaginable numbers and types of creatures, up to and or including multi-verses, string theory, etc.  It is actually the height of arrogance (which is one of man's huge problems) to consider our existence the only one.Geeze. Come on. Why get stuck bandying about such things? Even in science there are some things taken as givens concerning a theory, etc. until something arises to better explain or prove those things to be wrong or of no consequence to the subject at hand.  The very concept of god has to include as part of the subjects nature those abilities - whether or not we can quantify or experience them in any way. To limit the idea of god to our understanding (or our ability to understand) of his capablities would immediately take him out of the god business and make him man.

Science be damned!  I'm saying from my theist perspective, , God creating one finite universe makes no sense!!! 
Regards,
quadz

I agree.

QD

[DaHanG]

If it can't be easily recorded, observed, inferred, or calculated, religious people will invariably blame it on God, instead of looking for a real answer, and in doing so, they majorly handicap their intellectual growth and their general understanding of the universe.
"God" is the lazy-man's answer to the hard questions that are produced by having a modicum of intelligence.

I remember hearing a ruler of a rather large nation saying that religion is the opiate of the people. I also remember rulers of that nation saying their belief system would swallow the rest of the world because god was dead. None of which has come to pass.

the irony behind marxism is that it is still dogma - the real problem in my opinion. any sort of dogma, religious or not, can be twisted into very negative results. the "we shall conquer because our nation is _____" type mentality or "only X can get in heaven because of Y!" are very similar statements to me in terms of an ingroup/outgroup idealogy. it is not at all surprising that the godless communist soviet union failed to me. godlessness was not the reason though.

i didn't infer that you meant godlessness was the reason, but in case you did there's my 2 cents.

DHG

[Whirlingdervish]

Are you truly saying religious people are uneducated morons without a modicum of intelligence?

NO! ROFL!

I'm saying that if we were as dumb as the rest of the apes, we wouldn't ask questions about abstract concepts like the beginning of the universe..

The difference I was trying to illuminate between religious people and those who tend to use science to answer their questions is:

Getting all the answers handed to you in a book is not a very useful way to increase one's cognitive capacity.

Developing shrewd questioning to outline exactly what it is you want to know, and then attempting to answer it thru observation and deduction is a good way to become more intelligent.


As I see it, religious people often paint themself into a corner with "Facts" and "Answers", while scientists are constantly broadening their horizons thru questioning the way things are and the way things were.

asking questions is not really all that popular when it comes to a certain point with religion..
examples: (use these to stump your favorite preacher)

"who made god?"
"how can we have free will, if God knows what is going to happen to us?"
"what happens to God when the universe collapses?"

[DaHanG]

like?

i guess you don't believe in the holy spirit, to each his own.

and you do? i thought you were a theist, but not a christian???

or do you like this idea that man created as well???

 

[QuakeDuke]

the irony behind marxism is that it is still dogma - the real problem in my opinion. any sort of dogma, religious or not, can be twisted into very negative results. the "we shall conquer because our nation is _____" type mentality or "only X can get in heaven because of Y!" are very similar statements to me in terms of an ingroup/outgroup idealogy. it is not at all surprising that the godless communist soviet union failed to me. godlessness was not the reason though.

DHG

Actually, thank you for clarifying the point I was trying to make (maybe I'm mistaken and you didn't  ) which is dogmatic behavior belongs to all - not just religious people although it seems to be used more when referring to religious people than anyone else.  As I stated somewhere (it's in/on tastyspleen somewhere ) sometime ago, closed mindedness - from anyone hinders the free flow of thought (or something like that).

i didn't infer that you mean godlessness was the reason, but in case you did there's my 2 cents.

I didn't take it to mean that you did, and I didn't. I mean the old saying "pride goeth before a fall" usually has at it's root the kind of arrogance and closed mindedness demonstrated in the example.

QD

[quadz]

i've been to church before, and i've never seen a hat like that

[Whirlingdervish]

agreed.

Even if "He" set the ball rolling, is there really any need for God to chase it down the hill and keep kicking it 'till it gets to the bottom?

[DaHanG]

You have repeatedly pointed out that there's the possibility that a Universe that could support life, is an extremely unlikely configuration to erupt from the Singularity.  However, I would like to read more about the science behind that claim, since I haven't run across that claim in my own reading.  Unless there's strong science behind that claim, I don't see why I should take it on faith.

But again, the main point where I strongly disagree with your position, is that you claim we can't understand what happened after the Big Bang without knowing what happened before it.  Hawking makes the opposite claim, "At a singularity, all the laws of physics would have broken down. This means that the state of the universe, after the Big Bang, will not depend on anything that may have happened before, because the deterministic laws that govern the universe will break down in the Big Bang."  Now, I would never say it's _impossible_ that he's wrong.  But he's devoted his LIFE to the study of singularites and how they operate in the framework of General Relativity and quantum mechanics.  He knows enough about how they interact with the lowest fundamental forces of nature to predict things about them that are only later verified by observation.  So I'm going to go with his opinion on this one.

i must say that taking stephen hawking over reaper on big bang knowledge is _not_ (stress underscores) a good decision.

[reaper]

You have repeatedly pointed out that there's the possibility that a Universe that could support life, is an extremely unlikely configuration to erupt from the Singularity.  However, I would like to read more about the science behind that claim, since I haven't run across that claim in my own reading.  Unless there's strong science behind that claim, I don't see why I should take it on faith.

do you think i misquoted stephen hawking when he says that this universe is extremely improbable(paraphrased).   earlier in this thread, i referenced the chapter and page number where he makes my point.

i don't think he would like to rephrase his ideas like this:
IF there is a god
THEN we can't say if what happens before the big bang relates to what is happening after

if science does prove there is only one big bang, i bet even more people will jump on the god boat.  either way, it doesn't matter to me, i'd still believe in god, unless science could explain how and why things happen.

i guess you don't believe in the holy spirit, to each his own.

and you do? i thought you were a theist, but not a christian???

or do you like this idea that man created as well???

i believe in a personal god of mankind.  one that can read your mind, and destroy/alter/create the "universe".  and by believe, i mean i think it's likely such a god exists.  i do not believe in the holy spirit, i haven't been to church in ten years; the bread sucks, the wine sucks, only eighty year old women - why go?

[QuakeDuke]

Getting all the answers handed to you in a book is not a very useful way to increase one's cognitive capacity.

I tried to tell that to my teachers all the way through school - didn't work though they made me use texts anyway....

As I see it, religious people often paint themself into a corner with "Facts" and "Answers", while scientists are constantly broadening their horizons thru questioning the way things are and the way things were.

I've noticed this painting into a corner thing isn't restricted to religious people We can all do this pretty easily if we aren't careful

asking questions is not really all that popular when it comes to a certain point with religion..
examples: (use these to stump your favorite preacher)

Hmmm.. I'm my grandkids favorite preacher, so.... here goes....

"who made god?"

Who knows? Why is it important to know this?  Would our somehow being able to answer this question produce belief in god? Would the answer to this question somehow give us a starting place to understand god?  Isn't this a bit like asking "how did the universe come to be" and then refusing to believe in the universe because the question can't be answered (actually, we're just barely beginning to understand the question, much less the answer)- yet.

"how can we have free will, if God knows what is going to happen to us?"

My having knowledge that my son would end up in jail if he continued to behave in a certain way in no way infringed on his "free will" to continue the behavior that ended up with him spending 2 1/2 years in a federal pen in Texarkana. He had the "free will" to behave however he wanted, regardless of my knowing what was going to happen to him.

"what happens to God when the universe collapses?"

I am assuming you mean what would physically happen to God? Setting aside that most concepts of god has him as a spirit being (able to manifest himself in a physical form whenever / however he chooses)  the entire concept of god as creator (not being created himself) would postulate (by the very nature of godhood) he exists independent of the universe, the universe collapsing would have no effect on him.

Asking questions is not really all that popular when it comes to a certain point with a lot of people / subjects, not just religion. Witness the childish behavior of our (USA) politicians clinging to their side (both are guility) as being "right" and ignoring the evidence to the contrary. If I may quote from religious texts (if it offends, I'm sorry, it's still true) "every man's way is right in his own sight".

QD