Did a God or Gods create the universe? EDITED
-
Thanks for the link, Mike. I do not consider myself a militant atheist, but I do feel we should vigorously defend the separation of church and state.
Edit:
“We are all atheists about most of the gods that societies have ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further.”
― Richard Dawkins
-
Richard Dawkins says what he wants, suites of freak..., because You do not know the Word of God!
Do not be naive, but study the Bible, and true science! Be logical! -
I hope some of you are doing design work in the midst of this discussion. And remember god and the devil are in the details.
-
On a sunday? Oh, you blasphemer you!
@unknownuser said:
Richard Dawkins says what he wants, suites of freak..., because You do not know the Word of God!
Do not be naive, but study the Bible, and true science! Be logical!'True science', 'logical' ... Your knack for acutely flipping the meaning of words upside down is unrivalled. And to my mind it belies the apparent strength of your convictions.
-
@unknownuser said:
'True science', 'logical' ... Your knack for acutely flipping the meaning of words upside down is unrivalled. And to my mind it belies the apparent strength of your convictions.
-
Would that be Intelligent Design work?
Yeah, I found that pretty rich too, Tom...coming as it did from what has to be the most illogical, anti-scientific, naive and just plain deluded person I have ever come across.
-
@alan fraser said:
Yeah, I found that pretty rich too, Tom...coming as it did from what has to be the most illogical, anti-scientific, naive and just plain deluded person I have ever come across.
He's something else, yes. However I try, I cannot work out wether he's serious or simply putting us on.
-
I've just spent some time listening to further talks on TED.
The first one I watched was,
Rick Warren on a life of purpose
http://www.ted.com/talks/rick_warren_on_a_life_of_purpose.html
Pastor Rick Warren, author of The Purpose-Driven Life, reflects on his own crisis of purpose in the wake of his book's wild success. He explains his belief that God's intention is for each of us to use our talents and influence to do good.I just could not warm to this guy. I also found it strange that he sat while presenting. Maybe he was not able to stand! If so that's fine but outside of that there was something unbelievable about the guy. On the other hand it appears he has sold 30 million copies of his book! So there must be many that do find him believable.
The next talker was,
Dan Dennett's response to Rick Warren
http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_dennett_s_response_to_rick_warren.htmlDan Dennett talked about something that I've had in mind for many years. That is that religious instruction in schools should cover the facts of all religions. I was educated by the Cristian Brothers and the Catholic faith was rammed down our necks with no mention of other faiths. I would have liked to have been taught about the other major faiths in the World as I feel such an education would have readied me for life far better. BTW, Dan fairly IMO takes Rick Warren's book apart and shows it for what it is .... non fact based.
After watching Dan Dennett I noticed that Billy Graham had a TED talk.
Billy Graham on technology and faith
http://www.ted.com/talks/billy_graham_on_technology_faith_and_suffering.htmlWhile I was aware of Billy Graham, I had him pegged as a 'Preacher', however I clicked the talk and listened. I was glad I did! Billy Graham has a very solid faith, he has believes that I don't agree with BUT I enjoyed his talk and found him to be a man that is capable of getting his believes across in a way that I do not find oppressive.
One thing that I did notice was that Dalkins, Dennett and Graham all have a good sense of humour whereas Warren seemed to have little.
I suppose one of the reasons this thread is lasting is because the participants are all searching for answers. The answers probably will never be found but searching in itself is a good thing.
Like the story Billy Graham told about his chat with Mrs Gorbachev while seated next to her at a dinner, I also am in the same boat as Mrs Gorbachev, not believing the various Judeo-Christian dogma but wondering that there must be a higher form in control.
-
Guys, it was not a surprise for me to be contradicted, since
“a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.” (1 Corinthians 2:14)Have a nice New Year!
-
@unknownuser said:
Guys, it was not a surprise for me to be contradicted, since
“a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.” (1 Corinthians 2:14)Have a nice New Year!
You are being contradicted because you continuously fail to write anything that isn't an impromptu hodgepodge of sophisms, idées reçues and ideological sloganeering.
Suggesting you're a priori right, doesn't a posteriori lend your musings the sheen of reason.
Nonetheless, happy New Year!
-
Happy New Year to you also Cornel.
-
@unknownuser said:
You are being contradicted because you continuously fail to write anything that isn't an impromptu hodgepodge of sophisms, idées reçues and ideological sloganeering. Suggesting you're a priori right, doesn't a posteriori lend your musings the sheen of reason.
The pot calls the kettle black ...
Happy New Year.
Cheers.
-
Point me to a sophism I've written in this thread.
Edit: happy New Year! If ya'll will excuse me now, "Sherlock"'s on.
-
Just found a nice site with responses to common theist arguments, provided with a lot of reference material http://whynogod.wordpress.com/
What do you think, does an absolute morality exists outside of religion?
I started to think about this after I watched the debate by Sam Harris and William Lane Craig - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqaHXKLRKzg The main thought I understood from Harris was that you can't find absolute morality in any cultural context, but it is something that we strive for when trying to achieve the maximum well-being and flourishment of a society, so therefor the moral standards in any society would naturally evolve towards an objective standard for it to strive and survive.Can the human species reach this understanding of absolute morality or will we just destroy ourselves before we do it?
-
I'm surprised it hasn't come up before (or I missed it), but The Case for Creation by Lee Strobel is an interesting read.
To quote from Wikipedia, "Strobel received a journalism degree from University of Missouri and a Master of Studies in Law degree from Yale Law School, becoming a journalist for The Chicago Tribune and other newspapers for 14 years. He states that he was an atheist and began investigating the Biblical claims about Christ after his wife's conversion. As a result of the evidence he discovered in his investigation, he chose to become a Christian."
-
Lee Strobel's books are quite good. I've read all of his work, currently 5 books IIRC, and would recommend them to anyone ... His treatment of the material is probably amongst the most balanced and unbiased you'll find. It's also solidly supported by facts. Strobel goes to great length to talk with recognized experts, both secular and of faith, concerning the Bible and it's content.
Another interesting read is John McRay's "Archeology and the New Testament" ISBN 9780801036088. It's would be fascinating simply for its coverage of ancient places that have been found even if one disregards any biblical connection. If you like ancient history, I'd recommend it on that merit alone.
Cheers.
-
I'll sign off with this thought - discussions of this sort are unfortunate. There are those that thrive in an environment of perceived persecution because it makes them feel powerful and secure in whatever it is they believe. They often actively seek martyrdom and indeed, incite views contrary to their own in order to validate their beliefs and feelings. I say unfortunate because isolating oneself in that sheltered cubicle removes tolerance, forbearance, introspection and usually logic from the field of play. The discussion (but thankfully not here at SCF) quickly devolves into name calling an the like.
The universe is vast and complex. Who is to say what exists, though by my feeling it isn't what is written by any organization that suggests that the common human is incapable of conducting life without the morality, leadership and/or monetary support of said organization.
To those of quiet faith, that do not judge, preach to or disdain, tolerate and even yes - enjoy the company of those around you with differing or even no faiths, I salute you. I personally think that if there were more of your sort faith wouldn't be having such a hard go of it these days. This discussion would have ended quite quickly.
Happy new year to all.
-
Edited:
@escapeartist said:
To those of quiet faith, that do not judge, preach to or disdain, tolerate and even yes - enjoy the company of those around you with differing or even no faiths, I salute you. I personally think that if there were more of your sort faith wouldn't be having such a hard go of it these days. This discussion would have ended quite quickly.
Good points for those of us with faith to remember. While telling the world that God gave everyone free will, we need to remember that we should do the same and allow those who don't agree with us the same courtesy.
-
I think debates like these only strengthen the believers on both sides and at same time generate tolerance.
Its generally an uncomfortable subject for many, maybe because of the way they have been indoctrinated. I include myself in that group. But open and honest debate on all subjects is to be welcomed at all times in my opinion provided that its done in a civil fashion and this debate is most civilised.
For me the bottom line for me is that some form of higher power is or formed what I perceive around me, the Universe. If some folks choose to identify this higher form as their God, I have no difficulty with it as long as they accept that I also have the right to come to my own conclusions.
I don't have much more to say on the subject and will bow out now.
-
@mike lucey said:
I don't have much more to say on the subject and will bow out now.
I bowed out around the bit on humans 'use to live to be 900 years old'... within the past 2000 years
Advertisement