Religion in Alaska (Anchorage, Fox: business, build, lessons)

[IndianaMatt]

Originally Posted by starlite9

You know, there is a lot of people that claim in the comfort of their front room sitting on the couch, there is no God.

But when they are looking at eminent extinction, such as a oncoming car in the same lane, a charging bear or other scary events.... They always seem to change their mind.

Course on airplane voice recorders, the pilot's last word befor impact is normally "S**T!"

I think it was General Patton that said "There is no Atheists in a fox hole!"

Go figure...

What kind of completely absurd sentiment is that?

So I would tell you that I am agnostic, because I live my life as a humanist, and base my reason on objective understandings of the physical universe as humans are able to perceive it, rather than medieval storybooks written and re-written a thousand times, and in response you would tell me, "Nah, you'll be a Christian on your deathbed"?

You fail at think.

EDIT: And while we're on it, WHO GETS MORALITY ADVICE FROM GEORGE PATTON!!??

[Marty Van Diest]

Originally Posted by Glitch

There are two kinds of atheists. Neither believe in a divine being, but there is one group that are anti-theists, or anti-religion, and the other group that has no animosity toward any religion. I fall into the latter group. I understand that the vast majority believe in some form of divine being. I would not like to be derided for my lack of belief, any more than someone else wants to be demeaned for their belief. Therefore, I do not belittle anyone's faith in the hope that they return the same courtesy.

I can respect that.

[RayinAK]

Originally Posted by IndianaMatt

What kind of completely absurd sentiment is that?

So I would tell you that I am agnostic, because I live my life as a humanist, and base my reason on objective understandings of the physical universe as humans are able to perceive it, rather than medieval storybooks written and re-written a thousand times, and in response you would tell me, "Nah, you'll be a Christian on your deathbed"?

You fail at think.

EDIT: And while we're on it, WHO GETS MORALITY ADVICE FROM GEORGE PATTON!!??

In other words, you feel that your wisdom takes precedence over everything in life, including what others have said of written on the subject. Right?

[RayinAK]

Originally Posted by Glitch

Patton was wrong.

Come on, Glitch Just because one knows that one knows all, it does not mean that one is right or wrong except on one's own's mind.

[RayinAK]

Originally Posted by Glitch

There are two kinds of atheists. Neither believe in a divine being, but there is one group that are anti-theists, or anti-religion, and the other group that has no animosity toward any religion. I fall into the latter group. I understand that the vast majority believe in some form of divine being. I would not like to be derided for my lack of belief, any more than someone else wants to be demeaned for their belief. Therefore, I do not belittle anyone's faith in the hope that they return the same courtesy.

Very well stated. I can agree with your points of view.

[starlite9]

Originally Posted by Glitch

Patton was wrong.

Well I know atheists on a sinking boat in the middle of the ocean are hard to find as well!

Funny how when the cards are down and a person's life appears to coming to an end, people find a God, not sure whom or who's it is, but they seem to be desperately grasping for something or someone they have been denying their entire life.

[IndianaMatt]

Originally Posted by RayinAK

In other words, you feel that your wisdom takes precedence over everything in life, including what others have said of written on the subject. Right?

My "wisdom" is gained from reading science, history, philosophy, etc. For example, I read Stephen Hawking, but not Dr. Phil; Carl Sagan, but not the Bible. I find the theories of philosophers and physicists a bit more compelling than some ancient texts professing to know things they cannot possibly know.

A scientific life remains a mystery. It celebrates the profound questions of existence, without ever replacing unknowns with quick, easily-swallowed 'truths.' (i.e., we don't know when the universe was born, so let's just say god made it in seven days).

The difference is that science is always evolving and it alwatys admits that it only has a tentative answer, until the next, better theory disproves the last. We keep searching, learning, questioning, thinking critically about the ideas of others. Its okay that we don't know; the point of life is the journey, not the destination.

Religious texts, on the other hand, have always professed to know things which they later must change to adapt to human knowledge. For example, we all can (now) generally agree that the earth is not 7,000 years old, right? We all can (now) agree that the earth is not the center of the universe, right?

[IndianaMatt]

Originally Posted by starlite9

Well I know atheists on a sinking boat in the middle of the ocean are hard to find as well!

Funny how when the cards are down and a person's life appears to coming to an end, people find a God, not sure whom or who's it is, but they seem to be desperately grasping for something or someone they have been denying their entire life.

Again, this is that arrogant attitude: "Sure you're an atheist, until you're life is in danger." How could you be so presumptuous in belittling others' beliefs?

[RayinAK]

Originally Posted by IndianaMatt

My "wisdom" is gained from reading science, history, philosophy, etc. For example, I read Stephen Hawking, but not Dr. Phil; Carl Sagan, but not the Bible. I find the theories of philosophers and physicists a bit more compelling than some ancient texts professing to know things they cannot possibly know.

A scientific life remains a mystery. It celebrates the profound questions of existence, without ever replacing unknowns with quick, easily-swallowed truths. (i.e., the universe was created in seven days).

The differnce is that science is always evolving and it alwatys admits that it only has a tentative answer, until the next, better theory disproves the last.

Religious texts, on the other hand, have always professed to know things which they later must change to adapt to human knowledge. For example, we all can (now) generally agree that the earth is not 7,000 years old, right? We all can (now) agree that the earth is not the center of the universe, right?

Wisdom is gained by a lot more than just reading from the wisdom or experiences of others, because it's mostly humbling experiences that lead to the truth. What in one's mind feels right or wrong means nothing other than that, or one's feelings. The minute one achieves wisdom is the moment one realizes one's concept of anything in life is nothing more than a minuscule portion of the truth, and even so it does not mean that this "truth" is a fact since most times is one's imagination.

Sciences evolve simply because there is not a definite truth in every stage of science. New discoveries are made every moment that leads one to believe that what one knew was not true. Take carbon dating, for example. Has it always been accurate from the beginning? Don't the parameters used change every few years? Science is trip one takes trying to discover an answer, or the truth, but "that" one thinks is the real truth changes from one moment to the next.

[IndianaMatt]

Originally Posted by RayinAK

Wisdom is gained by a lot more than just reading from the wisdom or experiences of others; mostly for one's own experiences that makes one humble.

I would partially disagree. The point of higher education is to grapple with the ideas of others, and then build on that combining those lessons with your own experience.

If I had to build a house with zero knowledge of carpentry, that house would not stand long. Similarly, if I had to devise a my own theory of the universe, without the benefit of modern cosmology and physics, I'd probably just say the earth is flat, the moon is cheese, and the stars are just light poking through holes in the sky.