Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Except these IDEAS don't come from a source of "truth" but a person.
Cutesy-poo cartoons or diagram don't say anything to me. That one just shows how condescending and snide the writer of it must have been. Although that's fairly typical of online evangelical atheists. (And maybe of online evangelists of any kind)
I'm saying if you take each premise on its own terms your premise does not really allow for any absolute truth, only a method to create an increasingly accurate model of reality, whereas mine would allow for absolute truths. Some to be learned in this life while some mysteries might not be revealed until the next.
That you think all religions are created by a person or persons is your own affair. It's not anything I, or anyone else, must accept or even find interesting.
Cutesy-poo cartoons or diagram don't say anything to me. That one just shows how condescending and snide the writer of it must have been. Although that's fairly typical of online evangelical atheists. (And maybe of online evangelists of any kind)
I'm saying if you take each premise on its own terms your premise does not really allow for any absolute truth, only a method to create an increasingly accurate model of reality, whereas mine would allow for absolute truths. Some to be learned in this life while some mysteries might not be revealed until the next.
That you think all religions are created by a person or persons is your own affair. It's not anything I, or anyone else, must accept or even find interesting.
I just don't think religion, no matter which one, holds much truth, certainly none that is absolute. That is why the religious need faith in order to believe what to me is unbelievable...
Science on the other hand , investigates, tests, and retests to substantiate their theories. How can you even say that science does not allow for absolute truth? You are using one example to type your posts.... Think about the discoveries science has made just in the last few decades.
Cutesy-poo cartoons or diagram don't say anything to me. That one just shows how condescending and snide the writer of it must have been. Although that's fairly typical of online evangelical atheists. (And maybe of online evangelists of any kind)
I'm saying if you take each premise on its own terms your premise does not really allow for any absolute truth, only a method to create an increasingly accurate model of reality, whereas mine would allow for absolute truths. Some to be learned in this life while some mysteries might not be revealed until the next.
That you think all religions are created by a person or persons is your own affair. It's not anything I, or anyone else, must accept or even find interesting.
Anyone looking for an "absolute truth"...need only read the portion of TRs post I bolded.
The Atheists don't seem to realize (or refuse to admit) they believe in what they believe on "faith"...no differently than a religious person has "faith" in what they believe. As long as "facts" are based on information that is potentially false...which all info IS...all you really have is "faith" in the merit of that information...and thus the "facts" based on that information.
So just as the "Believer" has "faith" in the merit of his/her theological viewpoint...the Atheist has "faith" in whatever they deem valid and credible. Just as the Believers' credence in their view may turn out to be misplaced...the Atheists' may also.
BOTTOM LINE: Gotta have "FAITH" in what you believe to be "TRUTH"...no matter WHAT it is.
I just don't think religion, no matter which one, holds much truth, certainly none that is absolute.
And that is your right and I have little or no quarrel with what you personally think. I just dislike solid declarations of "your religion=X." That it's an absolute fact the way pi being a transcendental number, or whatever, is a fact. I am mostly okay with "I don't think religion is X" or even "I am personally convinced religion is X." (And as should be clear I've been the same on religions very much not my own. I've also argued against people saying "Islam inevitably is Y" and I am not that sympathetic to Islam as such.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur
That is why the religious need faith in order to believe what to me is unbelievable...
I think that explains part of it and would explain why someone like you would need faith. I think many religious people also take into account things they would deem evidence. Namely miracles and the universality of supernatural beliefs across cultures.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur
Science on the other hand , investigates, tests, and retests to substantiate their theories. How can you even say that science does not allow for absolute truth? You are using one example to type your posts.... Think about the discoveries science has made just in the last few decades.
A computer is not absolute truth of anything, it is a device. Computers themselves are in many ways in process and flux. I am not typing on the "ultimate computer" and neither are you. We are typing on an imperfect creation by people lacking perfect knowledge of math or engineering or both.
It is true math can give proofs which are absolutely true so perhaps I spoke with too little caution. Still even in math not all things will likely ever be completely solved. All truth or facts in science are by nature incomplete. It is a process.
Yes "I have a computer" or "there is gravity" is a true statement, but it is also in some way an incomplete or vague statement. What is a computer? What are all the facts about the possibility of what computers can be? What is gravity? Why is gravity? Can a complete description of all things related to gravity be achieved?
Cutesy-poo cartoons or diagram don't say anything to me. That one just shows how condescending and snide the writer of it must have been. Although that's fairly typical of online evangelical atheists. (And maybe of online evangelists of any kind)
I'm saying if you take each premise on its own terms your premise does not really allow for any absolute truth, only a method to create an increasingly accurate model of reality, whereas mine would allow for absolute truths. Some to be learned in this life while some mysteries might not be revealed until the next.
That you think all religions are created by a person or persons is your own affair. It's not anything I, or anyone else, must accept or even find interesting.
I don’t agree with your statement, and find the charts to be brief, but accurate in their assessment of both Science, and Religion. To assume you will find knowledge in another life or solve mysteries to this life’s questions is not acceptable in today’s world. Answers based on myths without any sustainable facts have put religion on a dead end road, and their followers living in a dangerous fairy tail hiding from reality, while ignoring the damage their ignorance has and is bringing to humanity. With just the knowledge we have acquired from science thus far, the myths of religion from the flat earth, to the garden of Eden can be disproved. We no longer need more evidence to disprove the myths, or end the religious frauds which have kill hundreds of millions in our history. We just need to have humanity wake up and accept the responsibility for their own actions, and move ahead using verified truth as a basis to build our future on. Humanity will not survive using the feel good myths and lies used to control the masses in the past. They need to accept we are here building our own future, and it is our responsibility to make sure we provide an acceptable environment for future generations to continue the expansion of knowledge not continue the insane killing which have and are supporting religious myths..
The Atheists don't seem to realize (or refuse to admit) they believe in what they believe on "faith"...no differently than a religious person has "faith" in what they believe. As long as "facts" are based on information that is potentially false...which all info IS...all you really have is "faith" in the merit of that information...and thus the "facts" based on that information.
Just because something might possibly be less than 100% certain doesn't mean that any random guess is as good as any other. There's scientific "faith" backed up by multiple independent lines of objective evidence, and there's religious "faith" backed up by feelings, if that. They're hardly comparable, no matter how much certain groups of Christians want to pretend that they're the same thing.
And when Biblical facts are found, nonbelievers look for ways to ignore those facts. So in a sense, science also is guilty of not questioning what they believe.
Herein lies the difference between science and religion,and speaks to my point exactly.You believe biblical "facts" not because there is any evidence of them,but because the Bible TELLS you to believe them.You have told me and others that you believe in an issue being discussed in another thread,which I shall not drag into this discussion,simply because the Bible TELLS you it is correct.You believe on FAITH that it is true,and not on observable and tested FACTS.And because you believe in faith,you cannot stand the possibility that those facts may not be correct,and will desperately search for anything to support your faith,rather than allow the facts to speak for themselves.This is the difference I pointed out,and the point of the OP.When science realizes,through further inquiry,that it's ideas on a subject may not be totally correct,it researches further and tries to find the truth,EVEN IF that truth changes commonly accepted precepts.Religion does none of this.Religion denies error and defends it's dogma IN SPITE of any evidence to the contrary.It does NOT look to see if maybe it's ideas are incorrect.It firmly denies the possibility of it's being incorrect,because that challenges faith in it's authority.
Herein lies the difference I pointed out in the OP,with examples.
The fundamental difference is that science looks to answer questions that are so far unknown....Religion thinks it has all the answers, so never questions what they believe...God dunit.
Very fundamental difference. Religion is fairy tale which cannot be proven and requires a closed mind to accomodate it. The pragmatist, realist...the "black and white" person minus a good brainwashing will always choose science.
Herein lies the difference between science and religion,and speaks to my point exactly.You believe biblical "facts" not because there is any evidence of them,but because the Bible TELLS you to believe them.You have told me and others that you believe in an issue being discussed in another thread,which I shall not drag into this discussion,simply because the Bible TELLS you it is correct.You believe on FAITH that it is true,and not on observable and tested FACTS.And because you believe in faith,you cannot stand the possibility that those facts may not be correct,and will desperately search for anything to support your faith,rather than allow the facts to speak for themselves.This is the difference I pointed out,and the point of the OP.When science realizes,through further inquiry,that it's ideas on a subject may not be totally correct,it researches further and tries to find the truth,EVEN IF that truth changes commonly accepted precepts.Religion does none of this.Religion denies error and defends it's dogma IN SPITE of any evidence to the contrary.It does NOT look to see if maybe it's ideas are incorrect.It firmly denies the possibility of it's being incorrect,because that challenges faith in it's authority.
Herein lies the difference I pointed out in the OP,with examples.
EXACTLY....Well said!!! Religious dogma and control of the masses is much more important than actual evidence and facts.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You are using one example to type your posts.... Think about the discoveries science has made just in the last few decades.
The fundamental difference between science and religion
