The Top Ten Reasons....

[fccool]

Quote:

8: The slipperiness of religious and spiritual beliefs.

Not all religious and spiritual beliefs make testable claims. Many of them have a more "saved if we do, saved if we don't" quality. If things go the believer's way, it's a sign of God's grace and intervention; if they don't, then, well, God moves in mysterious ways, and maybe he has a lesson to teach that we don't understand, and it's not up to us to question his will. That sort of thing. No matter what happens, it can be twisted around to prove that the belief is right.

Yes, in itself it's not a terrible aspect of religion, but I can certainly see where one would have frustration or problem with it. I view the world from Socratic, and therefor agnostic perspective. Agnostic in terms that certain things are not for us to know. No matter how much we search, and how much we try, we won't find these answers on our own (i.e. as humans with limited life-spans).

Such idea is uncomfortable for many. It brings much fear, because they have to consider the possibilities that posed to whatever religious explanations that are given. In reality, "living right" should be a responsibility of a human being, not a Christian, or a Muslim and etc.

And that's what bothers me about religion. Instead of uniting, it divides. Instead of healing, it ends up hurting. Instead of progressing in knowledge and understanding, it tends to stagnate in it's own mediocrity and orthodoxy. The reality is that we can be adults in the matter, and view such behavior as plain human immaturity which much of the people don't grow out of.

I think I'll end the response to your points with the following story. I tell it quite a bit to illustrate the nature of religion and truth.

Back in the soviet union days a group of entrepreneurs came up with a classy little scam to sell the notebooks. They printed bunch of gibberish on the cover with a single word like "mushroom", or "tiger", or "horse". And people, by looking at this gibberish up close were supposed to see a 3D picture of "encoded painting".

These became fairly popular, and I remember going from desk to desk during recess and checking out the "3d images" of other students. We would all stare at these for minutes, trying to see the image. The irony is that almost all of us "saw the image" described by the word. Perhaps out of peer pressure. Perhaps, because we already knew what to see in advance, and we just imagined it.

It became quite a distraction, and the notebooks were banned, because students would stare at these, instead of listening to teachers. It was also revealed to us that there was no encoded photos. It was fake, just bunch of gibberish. But, having experienced "the vision" we denied it. Perhaps because our reputation and integrity was on the line in front of our peers, or perhaps because we indeed "see" something in all of that mess.

I find the religious experience to be very similar in nature. When one looks at the Bible, one is told what to see in advance, in spite of it being a mosaic of oral tradition that has been pieced together as a collection of ancient stories, and letters, and then systematically edited together to form a complete narrative.

When pointed to the facts, one's integrity is on the line to defend the subjective experience, thus it's perpetuated as "the truth", or perhaps because people really did "see" something.

However, coming back to the original point that I've made as a response to the very first statement, religion is a realm of philosophy. Philosophy concepts can be true and pragmatic, even if they are factually unprovable, or false in reality. Think of theater, film, fiction, music, art. In a way, all of these are exaggerations of ideals told as a certain story.

Likewise, a certain religion is an exaggeration of ideals that's should be a picture of creator as we picture Him, and perhaps as he reveals Himself to us. Whether you believe He exists or not, based on the lack of evidence, is irrelevant. There will always be religious thought, even at the peak of scientific progress, because as humans, we are limited by our perception.

You have a choice to continue to "prove" to people that God does not exist, and that their religion is false, which in itself is a futile task, as you must have figured out by now. Or, you can concentrate and relate to such people based on common and positive ideals.

You can choose to perpetuate the divisive nature of religious or scientific arguments (either you with us, or against us), or you can choose to show people that unifying ideals can be true irrespective of religious belief.

[skyblue888]

Let us continue our journey through space.

Every star is a sun. The eye can count in the sky about six thousand of these glowing orbs, but Hershel’s great telescope revealed twenty million more; and the great telescopes constructed since, have shown the existence of countless millions more. All these stars are speeding on their way through space, each guided by an invisible hand, pushed by an invisible power; each the centre of a system of worlds, perhaps vastly greater than our little system, and doubtless immensely more glorious.

The eye alone can detect the fact that the stars are of different hue. The telescope brings out these colours much more distinctly then the eye. If our eyes could appreciate the beauty of this blazing firmament of light, we should find it far surpassing the loveliest flower garden in its wealth of colours. Some stars, when seen through the telescope, are found to be multiple, consisting of systems of two, three, or more stars. Sometimes these stars of a system differ in colour. The inhabitants of the planets travelling around such systems of suns would see in the sky several suns glowing with different colours, as red, blue, yellow, and other colours.

How little we can comprehend of the beauty in the universe above, beneath, and all about us!

Some stars are brighter than others. These are not necessarily larger. The dim stars are those farthest away. We can perhaps form the best conception of the immensity of space by undertaking to measure the distance to our nearest neighbours in the starry heavens.

Let us take for our measuring stick a ray of light, which travels at the rate of one hundred and eighty thousand miles a second, (seven times around the world in a second of time). Travelling with this immense, almost immeasurable velocity, light requires three and one-half years to reach the nearest star. The brightest star in the heavens, Serus, is some hundreds of times as large as our sun. It is so far away that its light must travel fourteen years to reach us. There are stars so far away that light may have been travelling for twenty thousand years, and not yet have reached us. Now and then a new star shines out in the sky, not as a new creation, but as a light which has at last come to us after untold ages of flight through boundless space.

Now, try to conceive what is on the other side of the farthest star. It is another star. Suppose one could be planted on the remotest bounds of the imaginable universe--as far as the imagination could stretch; so far away that thousands and thousands of years would be required for the light of the shining sun to reach us. What would he find—a boundary? If so, what sort of a one? No; he would see stretching on beyond him another universe still greater. Space is as infinite as infinity. Suppose that at this remote point in the universe a new star should be born. It might be thousands of years before the light of this new star would reach us. But the earth would feel the pull of the new star through the operation of gravitation the instant it was made. Gravitation acts instantaneously throughout all space. By this mysterious force of gravitation the whole universe is held together in a bond of unity. The whole universe pulsates at the movement of every shining orb.

We have here the evidence of a universal presence, an intelligent presence, and all-wise presence, an all-powerful presence, a presence by the aid of which every atom of the universe is kept in touch with every other atom. This force that holds all things together, (Col.1:17) that is everywhere present, that thrills throughout the whole universe, that acts instantaneously through boundless space, can be nothing else than the presence and power of God.

“Where shall I go from your Spirit? Where shall flee from Your presence?” Psalm 139:7.

[Igakusei]

You know sky, almost every single article on the website you're plagiarizing those from displays an astounding lack of scientific literacy. It's a rather bad resource.

[skyblue888]

They are taken from my website.

What is the problem Iga? you don't like what these posts are saying or how they put to rest the theories of uninspired men?

Aren't you getting your inspiration from a multitude of so-called scientific links?

sky

You know sky, almost every single article on the website you're plagiarizing those from displays an astounding lack of scientific literacy. It's a rather bad resource.

What "displays" are these?

Please tell us. I am very curious to see what these are.

[Igakusei]

I have been telling you, but you haven't been listening. They aren't putting anything to rest; they're making you look like a fool to anyone who paid attention in 6th grade science class.

[skyblue888]

I have been telling you, but you haven't been listening. They aren't putting anything to rest; they're making you look like a fool to anyone who paid attention in 6th grade science class.

Igakusei

_________

oooookay but who are "they"?

Yet it is written, "The fool has said in his heart, There is no God." Psalm 14:1.

Here is something from one who was a true scientist:

"'Power belongs unto God.' Psalm 62:11. 'There is no power but of God.' Romans 13:1.

There is no other source of power. It does not seem as though it ought to be difficult for people who believe in God to believe that power, without any qualification of limitation, belongs to God, that is, it pertains to God; it is His attribute. Suppose we take it that God has power, but He has not all the power there is. If that were so, there would be another God, would there not? That would make it necessary!

Suppose we say He has some power in the universe, and that there is another being in the universe who has some power. Then the question will be, Which is the greater? There would be a controversy in the universe. Now just such a controversy has arisen. Lucifer, the light bearer, has claimed equality with God, and has presumed to dispute the possession of power. But I thank God there is no question about the outcome, or about the facts. Power belongs to God, and therefore we do not need to wait until the end to arrange ourselves on His side. But we know from the Bible and from nature that power, absolute and universal, all the power there is, belongs to God. Don’t you see that if it were not so, there would be some part of the universe over which God did not have any right to control?

And if we could find out who those certain ones are that have power that does not belong to God, we would not have any ground whatever to stand on in preaching the gospel to them. They would say, We never received anything from your God, and we don’t owe Him anything!

Can we see that the question of division of power is simply the question, How many gods are there? There is one God, and only one.

Well it is wonderful to me, every day I live, and the longer I live the more wonderful it is to me, into how small a space, and how simple a truth, all the truth is resolved. Whoever comes to the recognition of this fact, and holds himself to it, has all the truth there is in the universe. God is, and there is no other. 'He who comes to God must believe that He is.' Hebrews 11:6. That is His name. 'I Am.' Exodus 3:12. God is. Where? He is. Go where you will in the universe, and there it can be said, He is! His name means eternal presence! You know it says in Psalm 139:7, 'Where shall I go from Your Spirit? Where shall I flee from Your presence?' He is an ever-present God! Jeremiah 23:23,24.

Lucifer had thought to divide divine honours with the Lord. He had said, 'I will be like the Most High,' and he has instilled that spirit into mankind from the very beginning, saying, 'In the day that you eat thereof, ye shall be like God.' Isaiah 14:14; Genesis 3:5. I believe that was why our first parents cut loose from God. They thought they could get along without Him. It is all involved in that; Satan said, I have power outside of God. I am independent of Him. Satan made them believe that. Satan changed the truth of God into a lie. He forgot that all creatures, including himself, live by the will and power of God. They are recipients of the life of the Son of God, for in Christ all creatures live and move and have their being. Acts 17:28. ' In Christ all things hold together.' Colossians 1:17. E.J. Waggoner, Studies in the book of Hebrews; 1897 General Conference Bulletin, 84,85.

sky

[Overaged]

Sky,

Do you ever bother to think for yourself? I don't think I've ever seen you post anything that doesn't primarily consist of someone else's quotes.

You know that I don't believe EGW was anything special, right? Why do you think those would mean anything to me, other than to convince me further that she was delusional?

For one thing; sky is likely also posting for others who actually are interested in knowing the other side of this venomous equation you keep presenting in one form or another on this board. For another thing; while you constantly pepper us with counter-claims, you present very poor, if any real evidence.

[Overaged]

You know sky, almost every single article on the website you're plagiarizing those from displays an astounding lack of scientific literacy. It's a rather bad resource.

You, who constantly brags about being so "scientific" constantly sees fit to make it personal and come up with such ludicrous accusations. How do you expect anyone, even in grade 4 to believe what you say when you add this kind of garbage to the mix?

[fccool]

I think he is referring to instantaneous speed of gravity mentioned among other things.

I do believe it's a waste of time to speak scientifically to a hardcore Christian who counters these ideas with Biblical quotes , and likewise to discuss to discuss the scientific ideas by throwing Bible quotes at scientifically minded.

[skyblue888]

The true scientists are those who recognize that "In Him all things hold together." Col.1:17. Any teaching contrary to this declaration of Holy Writ cannot be said to be genuinely scientific. It can only be false science.

"The deepest students of science are constrained to recognize in nature the working of infinite power." E.G. White, Education, 134.

This is a Christian forum, by the way.

sky

[Overaged]

The true scientists are those who recognize that "In Him all things hold together." Col.1:17. Any teaching contrary to this cannot be said to be genuinely scientific. It is nothing but false science.

There is no union between light and darkness.

"The deepest students of science are constrained to recognize in nature the working of infinite power." E.G. White, Education, 134.

sky

This is quite true. Some "scientists" who wish to oppose christianity would have the public believe that science and the Bible have nothing to do with each other; but nothing could be further from the truth.

[Overaged]

I have been telling you, but you haven't been listening. They aren't putting anything to rest; they're making you look like a fool to anyone who paid attention in 6th grade science class.

4th grade science would tell you that just because someone is not in agreement; it does not follow that they "are not listening."

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: skyblue888

The true scientists are those who recognize that "In Him all things hold together." Col.1:17. Any teaching contrary to this cannot be said to be genuinely scientific. It is nothing but false science.

There is no union between light and darkness.

"The deepest students of science are constrained to recognize in nature the working of infinite power." E.G. White, Education, 134.

sky

This is quite true. Some "scientists" who wish to oppose christianity would have the public believe that science and the Bible have nothing to do with each other; but nothing could be further from the truth.

Yes, absolutely.

Oh methinks you would love A.T. Jones' 1897 lectures titled The Science of Salvation.

sky

[Overaged]

Yes, absolutely.

Oh methinks you would love A.T. Jones' 1897 lectures titled The Science of Salvation.

sky

Is that on your site anywhere? Can you pls pm me with the link if it is?

[Igakusei]

oooookay but who are "they"?

In the context of my reply, "they" was referring to your arguments. You said they were putting the claims of modern science to rest. I said they were doing no such thing, and only making you look silly.

[Igakusei]

Originally Posted By: Igakusei

I have been telling you, but you haven't been listening. They aren't putting anything to rest; they're making you look like a fool to anyone who paid attention in 6th grade science class.

4th grade science would tell you that just because someone is not in agreement; it does not follow that they "are not listening."

She accused me of not even responding to her claims by challenging me to do so.

That doesn't tell me that she disagrees with my responses, it tells me that she didn't even read my posts carefully enough to understand that I was offering responses.

But, why would she bother to try to understand me. I'm of the world, and therefore can only be full of lies. Or something like that.

[Overaged]

quote=Overaged]quote=Igakusei]I have been telling you, but you haven't been listening. They aren't putting anything to rest; they're making you look like a fool to anyone who paid attention in 6th grade science class. /quote]4th grade science would tell you that just because someone is not in agreement; it does not follow that they "are not listening." /quote]

She accused me of not even responding to her claims by challenging me to do so.

That doesn't tell me that she disagrees with my responses, it tells me that she didn't even read my posts carefully enough to understand that I was offering responses.

But, why would she bother to try to understand me. I'm of the world, and therefore can only be full of lies. Or something like that.

Well; you read a lot into an internet post that just isn't there. You may want to consider just how "scientific" you are when you do that.

If you are "of the world" then obviously, you hold contrasting beliefs to christianity; and some of them, yes, christianity would classiffy them as a lie; but I don't think anyone is actually calling you a liar. Your posts are too defensive making them veer far away from being "scientific." Just sayin.

[skyblue888]

She accused me of not even responding to her claims by challenging me to do so.

That doesn't tell me that she disagrees with my responses, it tells me that she didn't even read my posts carefully enough to understand that I was offering responses.

But, why would she bother to try to understand me. I'm of the world, and therefore can only be full of lies. Or something like that.

Igakusei

________

When did I accuse you or anyone of anything? I have made general statements without accusing anyone. I have only addressed ideas exposing them mostly with the words of inspiration.

And why is it that people think I am a woman!!! hehe

Is "sky" a female username?

Igakusei, I am a man of 59 years of age and been in the ministry for 35 years.

sky

[Overaged]

And why is it that people think I am a woman!!! hehe

Is "sky" a female username?

Igakusei, I am a man of 59 years of age and been in the ministry for 35 years.

sky

Now there is a perfect example of reading things into an internet post that are NOT there. lol

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: skyblue888

And why is it that people think I am a woman!!! hehe

Is "sky" a female username?

Igakusei, I am a man of 59 years of age and been in the ministry for 35 years.

sky

Now there is a perfect example of reading things into an internet post that are NOT there. lol

hehehe

You know what Over, as you know, I have been refraining from making any kind of accusations and yet I am accused of having made accusations. It was me who was accused of being a fool because supposedly I have been listening to 4th and 6h grade teachers!!! and I responded to that in kind. Anyone who reads this thread will see this.

This must be another case of "Damned if you do; damned if you don't."

sky

[Igakusei]

...

What is the problem Iga? you don't like what these posts are saying or how they put to rest the theories of uninspired men?

...

What "displays" are these?

Please tell us. I am very curious to see what these are.

I was referring to this.

Perhaps "accused" was too strong a word. I didn't intend to convey the connotation that you two derived from it.

Anyway, your response here indicated to me that you hadn't been listening and/or understanding me, since all I had done for the first several pages was explain how what you were saying displayed gross scientific ignorance.

After all that, you jumped back with "please tell us, I'm very curious to see what they are."

Like the strawman implying that the alternative to God holding the planets in orbit must be that they were "shot" into space by some sort of massive cannon.

And the endorsement of deity-maintained vitalism.

I've thought you were a women because of the combination of your username and the way you post. You remind me of my mother. My apologies for the confusion.

Overaged, this thread isn't about me presenting positive scientific evidence for a lack of any gods, so I don't know why you keep bringing that up. This thread is about the lack of evidence for said gods. The conversation immediately devolved into arguing about whether or not life requires constant and active intervention from God. Once again the issue is not evidence demonstrating that there is active intervention, but a complete lack of evidence demonstrating that active intervention of any sort is required.

What do you want me to do?

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: skyblue888

Yes, absolutely.

Oh methinks you would love A.T. Jones' 1897 lectures titled The Science of Salvation.

sky

Is that on your site anywhere? Can you pls pm me with the link if it is?

Sorry Over but I don't have a link for it. I have to type every word taken from the General Conference Bulletins which I have here with me.

sky

[skyblue888]

I've thought you were a woman because of the combination of your username and the way you post. You remind me of my mother. My apologies for the confusion.

Igakusei

__________________

No need to apologize. It's okay.

Not sure why you say I remind you of a woman because of the way I post!!! I remind you of your mother!!!

Mind telling me why?

sky

[Outta Here]

The Gender Genie thinks differently:

Quote:

Original: Overaged, this thread isn't about me presenting positive scientific evidence for a lack of any gods, so I don't know why you keep bringing that up. This thread is about the lack of evidence for said gods. The conversation immediately devolved into arguing about whether or not life requires constant and active intervention from God. Once again the issue is not evidence demonstrating that there is active intervention, but a complete lack of evidence demonstrating that active intervention of any sort is required.

Keywords: overaged this thread [is] [not] about [me] presenting positive scientific evidence for [a] lack of any gods so i do [not] know why you keep bringing that up this thread [is] about [the] lack of evidence for [said] gods [the] conversation immediately devolved into arguing about whether or [not] life requires constant [and] active intervention from god once again [the] issue [is] [not] evidence demonstrating that there [is] active intervention but [a] complete lack of evidence demonstrating that active intervention of any sort [is] required

Words: 85

(NOTE: The genie works best on texts of more than 500 words.)

Female Score: 116

Male Score: 78

The Gender Genie thinks the author of this passage is: female!

Quote:

Original: You know what Over, as you know, I have been refraining from making any kind of accusations and yet I am accused of having made accusations. It was me who was accused of being a fool because supposedly I have been listening to 4th and 6h grade teachers!!! and I responded to that in kind. Anyone who reads this thread will see this.

Keywords: you know [what] over [as] you know i have been refraining from making any kind of accusations [and] yet i am accused of having made accusations [it] [was] [me] [who] [was] accused of being [a] fool because supposedly i have been listening [to] 4th [and] 6h grade teachers [and] i responded [to] that in kind anyone [who] reads this thread will see this

Words: 63

(NOTE: The genie works best on texts of more than 500 words.)

Female Score: 18

Male Score: 112

The Gender Genie thinks the author of this passage is: male!

[skyblue888]

what? :)