UrbanMasque
Everyone Wears a Mask
NickKmet said:
I can accept that, until you encounter the problem of faith restricting scientific advancement as it has tried to do throughout human history (unsuccessfully).
You NEED to see this
- Thread starter UrbanMasque
- Start date
I can accept that, until you encounter the problem of faith restricting scientific advancement as it has tried to do throughout human history (unsuccessfully).
Ted_Wolff
Rookie
Nah, Bretimus. That's what I was saying but didn't finish. A believer still would need faith when praying or to reach heaven. If science proved God's existence it wouldn't necessarily prove he answers prayers and how he admits Little Jimmy into his Holiest of Holies, or whatever. Little Jimmy would still need faith to believe in that jazz.
Heck, don't people say, "Oh well the Bible proves God exists!" And if the Bible is more ironclad than lowly science (in some eyes), I doubt those believers cease to have faith because God, by the Bible, has long been proven to exist.
Then again, I don't really know what I'm arguing. I just grabbed a salient point to get this topic back on point (somewhat).
Heck, don't people say, "Oh well the Bible proves God exists!" And if the Bible is more ironclad than lowly science (in some eyes), I doubt those believers cease to have faith because God, by the Bible, has long been proven to exist.
Then again, I don't really know what I'm arguing. I just grabbed a salient point to get this topic back on point (somewhat).
MikeyVassallo
Regular
UrbanMasque said:
You realize that most of the early scientists worked for the Catholic Church, right?
UrbanMasque
Everyone Wears a Mask
Like? names please.
MikeyVassallo
Regular
Johannes Kepler
Frances Bacon
John Napier
Albertus Magnus
Nicolaus Copernicus
Galileo Galilei (Although he got in to arguments with the Church often but eventually they knew he was right)
René Descartes
Robert Boyle
Isaac Newton
I mean you have heard of some of these guys, yes?
I mean there are loads more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ch ... in_science
Frances Bacon
John Napier
Albertus Magnus
Nicolaus Copernicus
Galileo Galilei (Although he got in to arguments with the Church often but eventually they knew he was right)
René Descartes
Robert Boyle
Isaac Newton
I mean you have heard of some of these guys, yes?
I mean there are loads more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ch ... in_science
UrbanMasque
Everyone Wears a Mask
you said "Worked", there is a difference.
Also, back then you couldn't popularize an Idea that varied from the CHURCH w/o the churches "corrections" or without you yourself being "a christian". Lest the population considers you a blasphemer - and we know how the church handled those.
I'm curious as to how many of these guys would identify themselves as christians today.
Especially Copernicous - yes. stal, yes... the earth is not the center of the universe.
I seem to have read somewhere that descarte, copernicous, and galileo were atheists.
Also, back then you couldn't popularize an Idea that varied from the CHURCH w/o the churches "corrections" or without you yourself being "a christian". Lest the population considers you a blasphemer - and we know how the church handled those.
I'm curious as to how many of these guys would identify themselves as christians today.
Especially Copernicous - yes. stal, yes... the earth is not the center of the universe.
I seem to have read somewhere that descarte, copernicous, and galileo were atheists.
MikeyVassallo
Regular
Yeah, as in the Catholic Church paid their bills. The Wiki link is christian thinkers in science, but the ones I listed were actually commissioned at one point or another.
Anyhow:
You have to understand that I'm not arguing for "creationism" here, I'm just saying your blanket opinion of religious people vs. whatever you are pitting them up against isn't a good one.
Anyhow:
You have to understand that I'm not arguing for "creationism" here, I'm just saying your blanket opinion of religious people vs. whatever you are pitting them up against isn't a good one.
UrbanMasque
Everyone Wears a Mask
Also.. Newton never declared a religion - so why is he on that list?
The catholic church funded everyone, from ideas to expeditions because they had the $$$ and the monopoly on the printing press.
The catholic church funded everyone, from ideas to expeditions because they had the $$$ and the monopoly on the printing press.
KoalaRainbowPoop
Rookie
why does this even matter anyways? any factual information or religious material about this changes throughout the centuries. long ago scientists used to think the earth was only few thousand years old. the bible did too.
has man finds more information those veiw points change. but the problem with that information is that people analyze to fit what they think. religion and both science do this. take the facts and make them fit as they want em too.
no one is 100% right, but then again no one is a 100% wrong either. how can we be when we know the answer, but not the question?
has man finds more information those veiw points change. but the problem with that information is that people analyze to fit what they think. religion and both science do this. take the facts and make them fit as they want em too.
no one is 100% right, but then again no one is a 100% wrong either. how can we be when we know the answer, but not the question?
This whole thing is retarded as fuck. Especially you guys.
Ignoring everything you have said, all I want to say is that I wish there was a different way to describe my religious beliefs besides "agnostic," because agnostic has such a bad connotation.
But it's hard to explain them to people. It's like, I don't believe in a God but I believe that it isn't impossible for a God to exist, nor do I believe that it's impossible for the Earth to be anywhere from 50 to 50,000,000,000 years old. Humanity will never be able to understand everything. We are so small yet think of ourselves as being so big, but that's off topic.
The point is that I don't believe in God but understand the possibility of it, and so far the only label to put on that is agnostic. But fuck the agnostics.
Ignoring everything you have said, all I want to say is that I wish there was a different way to describe my religious beliefs besides "agnostic," because agnostic has such a bad connotation.
But it's hard to explain them to people. It's like, I don't believe in a God but I believe that it isn't impossible for a God to exist, nor do I believe that it's impossible for the Earth to be anywhere from 50 to 50,000,000,000 years old. Humanity will never be able to understand everything. We are so small yet think of ourselves as being so big, but that's off topic.
The point is that I don't believe in God but understand the possibility of it, and so far the only label to put on that is agnostic. But fuck the agnostics.
MikeyVassallo
Regular
UrbanMasque said:
Look man, you said that Religion and Science have to be at odds, I think you have been shown that is incorrect.
"We are so small yet think of ourselves as being so big, but that's off topic. "
Longo with the wisdom.
Also, I don't understand all the hate for people who actually discuss things in a forum... it is a fucking forum. Urban and I are using it as intended.
UrbanMasque
Everyone Wears a Mask
True Koala, but the more information that becomes available to us about the history of our planet and its inhabitants - the more these religious groups have to stretch their beliefs (or make exceptions) to fit these findings.. and I think that makes their texts wrong.period.
Getting back on target there is nothing factual about religion, it may contain some historical accuracies, but on the whole its transparent and thin in terms of factual material - and you HAVE to speak up about it or else you are going to see MORE schools picking up this field of study.
Getting back on target there is nothing factual about religion, it may contain some historical accuracies, but on the whole its transparent and thin in terms of factual material - and you HAVE to speak up about it or else you are going to see MORE schools picking up this field of study.
UrbanMasque
Everyone Wears a Mask
Longo - i agree, we will not be able to understand everything but science builds on itself - so that one day we might possibly be able to better comprehend our existence and its cause in the future.. passing religion off as science (which is the basis for this topic) retards all scientific data.
Please tell me that ONE of you guys out there understands this concept.
Stal.. you've clearly not been paying attention to what I've been saying - youre just trying to play a "gotcha" game with me.`
Please tell me that ONE of you guys out there understands this concept.
Stal.. you've clearly not been paying attention to what I've been saying - youre just trying to play a "gotcha" game with me.`
MikeyVassallo
Regular
I didn't feel like I was playing the gotcha game, I felt like I was refuting your earlier statement.
I agree with you that the people in the video are nutjobs, but you wanted to group those people in with all people of the christian faith... and that is incorrect.
Then you said that science and religion have to be at odds... and that is also incorrect.
"The more religious groups have to stretch their beliefs to fit those findings"
That quote right there tells me you don't understand religion. Faith doesn't need validation. Go back to what Ted said.
I agree with you that the people in the video are nutjobs, but you wanted to group those people in with all people of the christian faith... and that is incorrect.
Then you said that science and religion have to be at odds... and that is also incorrect.
"The more religious groups have to stretch their beliefs to fit those findings"
That quote right there tells me you don't understand religion. Faith doesn't need validation. Go back to what Ted said.
I understand what you're trying to say perfectly, and I know exactly what you mean, but you're still a faggot.UrbanMasque said:
NickKmet
Regular
UrbanMasque said:
you're missing the point of what i'm saying Urban. I'm, not saying that there hasn't been conflict between religion and science - that much is extremely evident by even the most basic history textbook. I'm merely saying that there doesn't have to be. It's really up to individuals and the religious institutions to realize this. Most won't though, because they are stuck with traditions and customs that are conflicting and are attached to the religion even though they may not actually stem from the teachings themselves.
UrbanMasque
Everyone Wears a Mask
StalfrosCC said:
This is why the two, science and religion, will always be at odds.
Longo, I seriously LoL'd.. @ work. good one, but when i see you i'm still gonna punch you in the nose.
MikeyVassallo
Regular
Yeah, I get what you are saying, but it is incorrect. How can two things be at odds when they aren't even playing in the same ballpark?
UrbanMasque
Everyone Wears a Mask
I'd say both are trying to find out the origins of human existence. Not only are they in the same ballpark but playing directly against each other.. Both can't be right.
Unless adam and eve were 2 single celled organisms.
Unless adam and eve were 2 single celled organisms.
NickKmet
Regular
StalfrosCC said:
It's only when one tries to enter the other's realm. The catholic church did this heavily during the time of great thinkers like Galileo. That tradition has carried over into many American christianty sects. It's somewhat disgusting.
Does anyone know what specific school those students are from? I'm just curious considering the report made it sound like large amounts of American universities teach creationism.
Similar threads
