Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 01-27-2019, 01:59 AM
 
Location: Germany
16,784 posts, read 4,989,284 times
Reputation: 2120

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by GoCardinals View Post
"create".

This should perhaps take us to the path of answering your question as underlined about.

You agree that the cells were created. correct?
To answer your question, NO, I did NOT intellectually create my blood cells.

But you have already agreed that the cells WERE created.

So the question goes back to you.
If I didn't, then who designed and created those blood cells?
Who creates snowflakes? Snow pixies? Or is the better question, "what created* those blood cells"?

* We have no evidence they were designed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-27-2019, 04:15 AM
 
Location: West Virginia
16,677 posts, read 15,680,560 times
Reputation: 10929
Well, it appeared from this post that how the Universe started was pretty important to you and your belief.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GoCardinals View Post
Science does not have an answer yet when we ponder upon the fundamental question of “what or who started it all?
We only have our limited logic and intelligence (that varies from person to person) to make our assertions to answer this fundamental question.

What was there before universe? The answer is, - Either, “NOTHING”, or “WE DONT KNOW”.

If “NOTHING”, then the universe cannot decide to create itself when it did not exist.
It’s ridiculous. You can not decide to create yourself when you don’t exist.

If the answer is “WE DONT KNOW” - then there is always a possibility of God (call it a “force with intelligence). And there is always a possibility of “no God”.

It’s then up to us to base our assertions on logic, intelligence and research to form the faith whether God exists or does not exist.
Science cannot answer yet - so neither side has any evidence to support their faith - be it Atheists or Theists.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mensaguy View Post
I'm curious about something, GoC.

What difference does it make in your life, or in your religious belief, if you don't know how the Universe started? I ask because I can't imagine that it makes any difference at all what a person has for dinner, or how people conduct themselves at a religious ceremony. What difference does it make in anything you do?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoCardinals View Post
This is a very weird question.

Seriously, on one hand I don't know how to answer this precisely, and on the other hand I have a thousand answers.

How about I reply with a question?

What difference does it make in anything you do to know or not to know why I wonder about how the universe started?
I don't know why you thought it was a weird question to ask.

You raised the issue in a thread you started in the Religion and Spirituality forum. In fact, you said it was a "fundamental question of “what or who started it all?" If you think it is a fundamental question, it must be important to you. So, if it is important to you, I thought maybe you could tell us why it is important, or how it affects your daily life, or, in context of this forum, how it affects your religion or spirituality. It didn't seem weird to me. It seemed like a logical follow up to your post.
__________________
Moderator posts are in RED.
City-Data Terms of Service: //www.city-data.com/terms.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2019, 04:27 AM
 
1,456 posts, read 516,109 times
Reputation: 1485
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishbrains View Post
Welcome, and please continue to participate.

As with most areas of human existence, there are multiple answers and explanations. From an objective viewpoint, religion does not have any evidence to stand on, however you are correct, religious individuals look at things like beauty and interpret that as evidence.

That seems to be a bit of a chicken and egg conundrum to me. Are they viewing beauty and proof of god because they relate to the world emotionally, or do they believe in god, realize that intellectual arguments tend to work against them, and look for emotional arguments instead?

It almost doesn't matter. You are correct, atheists and theist often talk past one another, because we are using different types of processes to reach our conclusions. There is no objective evidence proving god, but many theists are emotionally fulfilled by believing.

I am completely ok with this, my main goal is understanding. I want people to understand that atheism, secular humanism, non-theistic lifestyle, whatever you want to characterize it as, is a valid stance. I don't really care if people believe in a god. I only care when they try to influence my life because of their god-belief, which is why I strive to get them to understand that there are good and valid reasons to disagree with them, and we should live and let live.
@ fishbrains

Thank you, much appreciated.

I'll let the rhetorical question stand, for I suppose the answer would depend on an individual. Although I do feel that this type of bifurcation may be lacking other perspectives.

As for your position, I think it is entirely reasonable and hope to hear of your experiences with it in the times to come.


Quote:
Originally Posted by GoCardinals View Post
I wouldn't call it "evidence".
IMO, the right term is "sign".

If you study Qur'an, you may notice it rather talks about "signs" and not "evidences".

For example:
“Say: ‘Praise be to God. He will show you His Signs and you will recognize them. Your Lord is never unmindful of what you all do..’” (Quran 27:93)

And when once takes a journey to reach to a certain destination, he rather looks for signs that may mean something to him, but the exact same signs may not mean anything to those who are traveling towards a different destination or have no destination at all.

IMO, it's all starts with, if one has a desire/want/need to find God's guidance in his life?
If yes, he takes this journey and tries his best to recognize God by his signs.

And those who demand proofs and evidences, will perhaps never find one, because there isn't any.
GoCardinals, thank you. You are quite correct in that the word 'sign' appears throughout the Qur'an. Ayat, the Arabic word for 'sign', is often read interchangeably as both 'sign' and 'miracle.'

Where I disagree with you entirely is in your treatment of evidence in Islam. Pretty much all of the studies of the Qur'an that I've seen define the word 'sign' as follows "tested evidence, absolute knowledge and expression of truth".

Not only that but the Scripture itself is considered to be evidence.

Take Surah Al-Bayyinah (Clear Evidence/Proof) [98]

Quote:
Those who disbelieved among the People of the Scripture and the polytheists were not to be parted [from misbelief] until there came to them clear evidence - A Messenger from Allah, reciting purified scriptures within which are correct writings. Nor did those who were given the Scripture become divided until after there had come to them clear evidence. And they were not commanded except to worship Allah, [being] sincere to Him in religion, inclining to truth, and to establish prayer and to give zakah. And that is the correct religion.[...]
On top of it all, the Qur'an encourages one to seek understanding, knowledge, and further proof (how far people allow this exploration to take them is another matter). It values intelligence and education, which is why there was such a burst of scientific inquiry in the early days of classical Islam.

Here, I'll leave you with the Surah Al-Isra [17:36]

Quote:
And do not pursue that of which you have no knowledge. Indeed, the hearing, the sight and the heart - about all those [one] will be questioned.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2019, 06:57 AM
 
28,432 posts, read 11,587,667 times
Reputation: 2070
Quote:
Originally Posted by Itzpapalotl View Post
Rather than interpreting same evidence differently, I think people rely on different standards of evidence altogether, so it becomes not so much an issue of interpretation as admissibility and/or permissibility of particular evidential claims.
yuppers. properly weighting evidence is a huge problem. When people assign weights based on personal experience it could through the weights off. when people don't see how their "brain state" is affecting the weights being assigned to a piece of evidence it can lead to disconnect that can't be closed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2019, 07:02 AM
 
1,456 posts, read 516,109 times
Reputation: 1485
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle View Post
yuppers. properly weighting evidence is a huge problem. When people assign weights based on personal experience it could through the weights off. when people don't see how their "brain state" is affecting the weights being assigned to a piece of evidence it can lead to disconnect that can't be closed.
I always recommend reading some Oliver Sacks to get a glimpse of how screwy our brains can get
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2019, 07:03 AM
 
28,432 posts, read 11,587,667 times
Reputation: 2070
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishbrains View Post
They weren’t designed, they evolved. The weren’t created ex nihilism, they used physical processes and existing materials to grow.
Your statement here is exactly why I say claiming that we are in a system of life is more valid than claiming we are not in a system of life.

Can you get me around the fact that the universe quantum computed "you".

How about this fish. Can you get me around the notion that when you "created a cup of coffee", that it wasn't the universe actually doing it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2019, 07:06 AM
 
13,011 posts, read 13,052,712 times
Reputation: 21914
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoCardinals View Post
So there is no design in how cells seem to appear to us?
We understand the biological processes of evolution. We know how genes mutate, how proteins combine, and dna governs the growth of a cell. It is silly to talk of design when we know physical processes behind cellular structure and function.

For a person to ignore all of that and look at a cell through a microscope and claim it is designed is simply a blatant disregard of the facts.

Quote:
And if you expand your theory, then your logic and intelligence must tell you that the entire universe and everything in it came together all by itself.
I have a few semantic issues with your statement, but putting this aside, yes. We understand many of the physical laws of the universe, and how they govern matter and energy. Gravity, chemical reactions, nuclear reactions, magnetism, etc seem to be sufficient to explain the structure of the universe. I will acknowledge that we have a knowledge gap in physics, where not everything has been explained, but what we do know is consistent with a physical ipuniverse.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2019, 07:16 AM
 
10,800 posts, read 3,597,574 times
Reputation: 5951
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matadora View Post
I’d like to know what experiments and tests have been proposed so that evidence of this intelligent design can be shown and measured?
There are a few of us waiting to see if you get an answer to this. A real, cogent answer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2019, 07:25 AM
 
28,432 posts, read 11,587,667 times
Reputation: 2070
Quote:
Originally Posted by Itzpapalotl View Post
I always recommend reading some Oliver Sacks to get a glimpse of how screwy our brains can get
How cool is it that these forums gives a glimpse into the brain. People with less valid claims keep hitting submit (posting) and by sheer volume drown out more valid claims. It causes a feedback loop that reinforces, well, anything, really.

Its almost like real time evolution. Reasonable doesn't really play a role. If enough like minded people assemble, that like mined thought is expressed. Like any habit or body part. if you really want a look, goto a site with negative reps. its actually amazing. The "facts" have absolutely no bearing on the brain states of the posters.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2019, 07:32 AM
 
28,432 posts, read 11,587,667 times
Reputation: 2070
Quote:
Originally Posted by normstad View Post
There are a few of us waiting to see if you get an answer to this. A real, cogent answer.
I hate to do this, but I only look at what the claim is. I have no stake in the answer. I don't hate religion and I don't love religion. If I were a theist I would say ...

The Miller–Urey experiment.

It would not have run if it wasn't set up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:40 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top