Protestant Family and my search for truth.

[Junket]

Atheism is simply the rejection of the theory of god...thats it...before the idea of god everyone was an atheist they just didn't know the word.

Atheists, like the religious, just like to label shit.

[IndiReloaded]

Atheists, like the religious, just like to label shit.

This is a deflective statement. Even if its true its not related to the fact that atheism is not a religion. Sorry.

[Tiay]

No, science is not a religion, because it's realization based on facts.

ka-ching. That's exactly what my atheism is, too. A realisation based on facts.

A theory is technically a religion, yes. Just because it is a theory developed based on science does not mean it isn't a religion. It's not like every religion is based on a magical book based on fairy tales. buddhism for example is basically a theory based on observations. *shrug*

hmm, so, if a scientist came along and theorised "I think birds are descended from dinosaurs, thus we might be able to find a proto-dino-bird skeleton to prove this", he is religious. In fact, you've just defined every scientist who's field is on the cutting edge (hence no proof of their theories yet) as religious. And as soon as their theory has proof, it stops being just a theory and thus the scientist stops being religious the second he lays eyes on the fossils he was looking for.
In fact, everything starts with a theory. You've also just made all inventors "religious" automatically. I could go on.

A theory is "an explanation for some phenomenon that is based on observation, experimentation, and reasoning."

Therefore, everyone theorises, every day. Let's say that I think my shampoo works better than brand name shampoo I've tried because of x ingredient. Oops, by your definition, I am now religious, until I research and experiment to prove my theory.

Where do you draw the line between mundane theorising like this, or the major kind of theorising about where life came from and so on?

You just have to accept that science is not 100% hard fact. just because it has soft edges and unclear bits, doesn't make those parts religious.

Your saying "I believe that [such and such] happened" is religion, until it becomes "I know, because it is scientifically proven that [such and such] happened"

yes, but not quite..
Religion tells you exactly on what day god made what. It isn't presented as a theory, it's presented as fact; this is how it happened. Not so much based on observation, experimentation or reasoning.

And science doesn't always present solid facts. Often we think we know something, and then we turn out to be wrong in the next experiment. But that didn't make the first assumption a religion. It just means that the known facts changed. Like gribble said.. show me a horn and hoof prints, and I might entertain the possibility of a unicorn existing.

The statement "I believe in the theory that that birds evolved from dinosaurs" isn't a religion. It's me making a reasonable assumption. We may discover later that for whatever reason, the proof we thought we had of this theory was wrong. Again, that didn't make my belief in the theory a religion.. that'd be silly.

The statement "I believe in god" is not a reasonable assumption because there isn't a shred of scientific evidence to support it, whereas the dino-bird theory, even if it turned out to be wrong, was backed up with scientific facts.


-------

Thanks for trying to revive the thread. I have many places to go. I have earned the respect of many people. I know several that would take care of me in such a way. My worry though is losing my family. I wish there was a way to just be myself and them accept it. I don't want to inject them with the fear that I'll go to hell. But anyway, I think I will just keep the religion to myself from now on and if they ask I will tell them it's none of their business. Atleast I admitted it.

*sigh*, it sucks, but I don't think there is a way, not without risk anyway. I think your safest option is to keep it to yourself, sadly.


-------

This thread is sucking. I've heard the same boring arguments every single time this topic pops up. Really, does anyone think the "flying spagetti monster" argument is still worth chuckling over? Or that the "I know because I know" argument is the least bit persuasive? As I said before, you are all wankers.

Good arguments don't die out like an ugly fad, they become better, more grounded and sophisticated over time.
Also, I didn't just say "I know because I know"! I agreed that, yes, I obviously can't possibly know: but, that would mean I would also have to entertain the possibility of the (obviously silly) unicorn and monster and so on, so because that would be silly, we must assume that I know that the world is real and that I know there is no unicorn, then it logically follows that I also know there is no god- even though at the same time I can't possibly know.

[IndiReloaded]

In fact, you've just defined every scientist who's field is on the cutting edge (hence no proof of their theories yet) as religious. And as soon as their theory has proof, it stops being just a theory and thus the scientist stops being religious the second he lays eyes on the fossils he was looking for.
In fact, everything starts with a theory. You've also just made all inventors "religious" automatically. I could go on.

A theory is "an explanation for some phenomenon that is based on observation, experimentation, and reasoning."

Therefore, everyone theorises, every day.

This is good Tiay, just be careful of your language which isn't precise (important for communicating ideas). Your ideas are good, but you are confusing the definitions of 'hypothesis' with 'theory'.

[vashti]

Good arguments don't die out like an ugly fad, they become better, more grounded and sophisticated over time.

This one hasn't.

[anachronistic]

That post was slightly rude, Tiay.

ka-ching. That's exactly what my atheism is, too. A realisation based on facts.

Ofcourse you mean belief, not realization. You basically just said that atheism IS science, which it is not.

hmm, so, if a scientist came along and theorised "I think birds are descended from dinosaurs, thus we might be able to find a proto-dino-bird skeleton to prove this", he is religious.

No, dear. Please see my definition of religion. That has nothing to do with religion. That's a hypothesis. After you've found the 'proto-dino-bird skeleton' and other evidence to support your hypothesis, you come up with a theory based on observation of your evidence and whatnot.

In fact, you've just defined every scientist who's field is on the cutting edge (hence no proof of their theories yet) as religious. And as soon as their theory has proof, it stops being just a theory and thus the scientist stops being religious the second he lays eyes on the fossils he was looking for.
In fact, everything starts with a theory.

Not necessarily. When a scientist states a theory about what was before, and/or what is after, it has the potential to be a religion. Because a theory is a theory, and not a law (Theories are not legitimate enough to be called "scientifically proven) if people choose to believe that according to the theory that's how everything is, then yes, that could account for a religion.

Did you know that a lot of theories are unsuccessful? It seems as though you neglected that thought.

You've also just made all inventors "religious" automatically. I could go on.

I don't really understand how. Can you explain this a little more?

A theory is "an explanation for some phenomenon that is based on observation, experimentation, and reasoning."

Therefore, everyone theorises, every day. Let's say that I think my shampoo works better than brand name shampoo I've tried because of x ingredient. Oops, by your definition, I am now religious, until I research and experiment to prove my theory.

Well, they're theorizing, but not founding a religion. Once again, see the definition of religion.

Where do you draw the line between mundane theorising like this, or the major kind of theorising about where life came from and so on?

I'm no scientist, and I couldn't tell you where to draw the line between the two. But what determines whether it is a religion or not, is basically the part that I have underlined in the quote.

You just have to accept that science is not 100% hard fact. just because it has soft edges and unclear bits, doesn't make those parts religious.

Well, the process of science is not 100% fact. But science itself is 100% fact and the search of 100% fact.

yes, but not quite..
Religion tells you exactly on what day god made what. It isn't presented as a theory, it's presented as fact; this is how it happened. Not so much based on observation, experimentation or reasoning.

Damn it. I hate it when people just think religion is another word for Christianity. Don't you realize that religion categorizes many different religions that are very unique to Christianity, some which pertain to a godless idea? CHRISTIANITY states that God created this and that on particular days. Not every religion is pro-creation, either. I hear people make this confusing mistake every time this debate comes up.

And according to The Bible, which is what the Christians study creation from, the words of the Bible were 'inspired' to them by God itself. It's your decision as to whether or not the people that wrote the Bible are nutbags, and you have every right to believe that every Christian is a nutbag, but for Christ sake, let them be a nutbag if they want, okay?

And science doesn't always present solid facts. Often we think we know something, and then we turn out to be wrong in the next experiment. But that didn't make the first assumption a religion. It just means that the known facts changed. Like gribble said.. show me a horn and hoof prints, and I might entertain the possibility of a unicorn existing.

A fact is indeed a solid statement that witholds the truth. If it does not hold the absolute truth, it is not a fact, it's an opinion... or from more scientific terms, a hypothesis. And so what? The unicorn might exist, but what's that got to do with religion? Well if it somehow has to do with how the earth and life and everything else came about, then yeah I guess, it has an indirect measure to religion, but not directly, unless it's some sort of "holy unicorn" that magically created the universe with the sound of its hooves clapping on cobblestone.

The statement "I believe in the theory that that birds evolved from dinosaurs" isn't a religion.

Well, you're correct, because in your examples, unicorns do not pertain to the definition of religion. I'm just repeating myself, I'm not trying to be mean.

It's me making a reasonable assumption. We may discover later that for whatever reason, the proof we thought we had of this theory was wrong. Again, that didn't make my belief in the theory a religion.. that'd be silly.

Yeah.

The statement "I believe in god" is not a reasonable assumption because there isn't a shred of scientific evidence to support it, whereas the dino-bird theory, even if it turned out to be wrong, was backed up with scientific facts.

That is the individual's decision. Not yours. The sole reason why religion exists is because it's not scientifically proven that there is no god(s), or afterlife. The big bang theory (I hope you already realize this) is not scientifically proven. Yeah, it's a theory and yeah, there's facts behind it, but it is not scientifically proven. It is not fact. For someone who seems to be as actively involved in science as you do, you should understand that.

*sigh*, it sucks, but I don't think there is a way, not without risk anyway. I think your safest option is to keep it to yourself, sadly.

Well, religion is a very personal topic. That's why it's dangerous to talk about. One has to be extremely civilized and reserved to debate it. The other thing is that everyone's trying to shove their own religion up another person's ass because they are very close minded and don't see the truth or understand what religion is; I said that before. If people were not so hostile and ignorant, there would be no problems with discussing religion.

Good arguments don't die out like an ugly fad, they become better, more grounded and sophisticated over time.

All arguments actually die eventually, whether the controversies are solved or not.

Also, I didn't just say "I know because I know"! I agreed that, yes, I obviously can't possibly know: but, that would mean I would also have to entertain the possibility of the (obviously silly) unicorn and monster and so on, so because that would be silly, we must assume that I know that the world is real and that I know there is no unicorn, then it logically follows that I also know there is no god- even though at the same time I can't possibly know.

That example was flawed and is not analogical to religion.

Anyway, please don't turn this thread into another this-is-why-my-religion-is-better-than-yours thread. That topic is wrong, and to the extent of my personal knowledge, nobody on loveforum including myself has the knowledge, proof, or credibility to back ourselves up in that subject. If you want to continue debating about this topic, Tiay, fine, but no bashing religion, okay? That goes for everyone else; in fact it's a forum rule isn't it?

[Only-virgins]

How the **** are they smarter if they don't have the CAPACITY? What are you smoking, man? Holy jumping fücking shitballs. Talk about a contradiction.

The Capacity to be stupid on PURPOSE. Purpose is the key word numb nuts. People have the potential to be smart so when they are stupid they deserve less pity unlike an animal that is limited by its brain size and brain complexity. You can't even comprehend what I am saying ... no point to debate with you. You answer posts here with all these pointless replies. Theist have to do one thing only, prove god..thats it...atheist have to do nothing..they can just sit back and do shit because the believer must prove his belief ...to make a claim doesn't force everyone else to instantly have to refute it. As an atheist my ears are open theists but how come all that ever comes out of your mouths is bullshit?

This thread is sucking. I've heard the same boring arguments every single time this topic pops up. Really, does anyone think the "flying spagetti monster" argument is still worth chuckling over? Or that the "I know because I know" argument is the least bit persuasive? As I said before, you are all wankers.

The flying spaghetti monster is not a argument, it is a religion! learn your truth! and you miss spelled his name...you will burn in the spaghetti hell. Eternal pizza sauce and meat balls up your a$$.

[IndiReloaded]

They do save hundreds of thousands of lives through charity, donations, community and volunteer work. I don't know any other organized entity that can compare to organized Religion in the amount of good that's being done. Maybe it's not as widely advertised as the "bad", but I'm of the opinion the good far outweighs the bad.

Don't forget where the organized medical organizations come from, early hospitals (esp hôtel-Dieu) and who were the early nurses. And who was first and still is responsible for a lot of funding of education as well (And I'm not talking just about the Catholic schools)

Mish. My Government spends MY tax dollars to fund huge numbers of public & social assistance programs, education, & health care. Way more than any religious charity, possibly more than most of them combined (tho I don't have that data, so that's a guess).

What I DO know is that My Government gives HUGE tax incentives to these organizations. In fact, they are tax exempt. Damn right they should be giving back. Bastards. Do you think that a scientists lab reagents are tax-free? Or the salary of their research assistants?

Hell no.

Nice try tho.

[DoesntMatter]

Wow lilwing that was a long post !!

What annoys me about a lot of atheists is they love to remind everyone how science supports them and they therefore think they are so knowledgeable about science and math and Christians are stupid, ignorant rednecks. The only part of the Bible they talk about is like a paragraph in Genesis when the book is ****ing long as hell.

Atheists just have too good a time disproving creationism (which is pathetically easy) and in the meantime love even more making Christians look like fools. Seriously, my best friend at college is an atheist and taking evolution and always talks about how people in the South who are religious thinks Jesus is going to fly out of the sky on a unicorn with rainbows shooting out of his ass if they deny creationism. Harp on something else for a change

But that's my main complaint about atheists. They are annoying. "Holy fux0rz you st00pid Jesus-freak, science is on my side!!!one!1!! I'm so much smarter than you!"

[Only-virgins]

Wow lilwing that was a long post !!

What annoys me about a lot of atheists is they love to remind everyone how science supports them and they therefore think they are so knowledgeable about science and math and Christians are stupid, ignorant rednecks. The only part of the Bible they talk about is like a paragraph in Genesis when the book is ****ing long as hell.

Atheists just have too good a time disproving creationism (which is pathetically easy) and in the meantime love even more making Christians look like fools. Seriously, my best friend at college is an atheist and taking evolution and always talks about how people in the South who are religious thinks Jesus is going to fly out of the sky on a unicorn with rainbows shooting out of his ass if they deny creationism. Harp on something else for a change

But that's my main complaint about atheists. They are annoying. "Holy fux0rz you st00pid Jesus-freak, science is on my side!!!one!1!! I'm so much smarter than you!"

Thats a type of Atheist. Most atheists are quiet about the entire thing and just simply don't give two sh*ts about religion. They just live their life. Like me ... though those atheists who do argue at least have some data to back themselves up while theists just pull sh*t out of their a$$ and expect people to believe a book...which is nothing but a book.

[IndiReloaded]

Atheists just have too good a time disproving creationism (which is pathetically easy) and in the meantime love even more making Christians look like fools. Seriously, my best friend at college is an atheist and taking evolution and always talks about how people in the South who are religious thinks Jesus is going to fly out of the sky on a unicorn with rainbows shooting out of his ass if they deny creationism. Harp on something else for a change

But that's my main complaint about atheists. They are annoying. "Holy fux0rz you st00pid Jesus-freak, science is on my side!!!one!1!! I'm so much smarter than you!"

DM, did you watch the vid in my post about 'Not all ideas are created equal?'. You should.

BTW, I never bring up the topic of creationism. Ever. To each their own. But when its brought up & discussed as if it is an actual, proven theory & it is proposed as part of a school science curriculum, you bet I speak up. I do the same for anything I consider to be unproven. You should hear me go about homeopathy. Lol.

[anachronistic]

The Capacity to be stupid on PURPOSE. Purpose is the key word numb nuts. People have the potential to be smart so when they are stupid they deserve less pity unlike an animal that is limited by its brain size and brain complexity. You can't even comprehend what I am saying ... no point to debate with you. You answer posts here with all these pointless replies. Theist have to do one thing only, prove god..thats it...atheist have to do nothing..they can just sit back and do shit because the believer must prove his belief ...to make a claim doesn't force everyone else to instantly have to refute it. As an atheist my ears are open theists but how come all that ever comes out of your mouths is bullshit?

I do see your point and I do comprehend it all. What I've been trying to point out though, is that it's just an argument over the definition of words. (I guess you're not seeing the sarcasm in my posts, either, because seemed to have went completely over your head)

And who said anything about me being a theist? This is what happens when you jump in the middle of a thread like you always do, OV!

edit: Bah, **** this topic.

[Only-virgins]

I do see your point and I do comprehend it all. What I've been trying to point out though, is that it's just an argument over the definition of words. (I guess you're not seeing the sarcasm in my posts, either, because seemed to have went completely over your head)

And who said anything about me being a theist? This is what happens when you jump in the middle of a thread like you always do, OV!

edit: Bah, **** this topic.

What do you always assume I am talking about you? I am simply replying to A comment that was posted. I never said " Lillwing is a theist".

[anachronistic]

What do you always assume I am talking about you? I am simply replying to A comment that was posted.

... oh stop overexaggerating. You quoted me and it seemed very direct. That's my excuse, anyway.

[Only-virgins]

... oh stop overexaggerating. You quoted me and it seemed very direct. That's my excuse, anyway.

Yea whatever. Thanks for the George Carlin PM ... he is my favorite already for a long time.