God vs. science

**Captain Coors** · 10-31-08, 05:35 PM

Thousands of religions in the world.

At the very least: All of them but one have it wrong.

More probable: They all have it wrong and man's desire to understand himself and his world prompts feeble attempts to write the story of God to explain our existence to ourselves and comfort us of our sorrows and impeding death.

I think there is a God of some sort, but it is nothing like any of us can possibly conceptualize. My religion is family, friends and country and that's plenty for me.

**Red_Lizard2** · 10-31-08, 05:44 PM

the thing with religions is they all have the same premises within them:

Beginning was perfect as created by God (the best is the Summarian in which Enki created the river by er....welll.....wacking off)
Sin gets introduced (in the bible its a forbidden fruit, Greek had the Pandora's box etc.)
Woman always cause the bad for some reason by the way, anyone notice that?
anyways
they usually explain things like why the sun shines, why people die etc etc.

Basically all religions try to explain things to people they did not understand at the time. Like if someone were to suddenly collapse, they had no clue what it was. So it was probably considered the will of a god. Now we know that it could of been many different reason for them to collapse, be it from heat, a stroke, heart attack etc.

**Agent** · 10-31-08, 05:59 PM

Originally Posted by Red_Lizard2

Basically all religions try to explain things to people they did not understand at the time. Like if someone were to suddenly collapse, they had no clue what it was. So it was probably considered the will of a god. Now we know that it could of been many different reason for them to collapse, be it from heat, a stroke, heart attack etc.

Exactly.

It is the fear of the unknown that forces people to attempt to explain what goes on in their every day lives, to let the masses know that its all ok and that everything happens for a reason, and because of "his" divine power.

Now in these times we explain things more practically and with scientific inquiry, rather than relying on hearsay and scripture.

But I dont have anything against christians, or religion for that matter.

**Mudstalker** · 11-01-08, 02:32 AM

We have tons of evidence of cave men, dinosaurs, life BEFORE even the dinosaurs. Yet that stuff didn't come from nothing scientists say, they say there was a big bang, caused by a bunch of atoms randomly hitting eachother way out there in space. Just randomly, something that has never happened again and obviously never happened before that. A one time occurence that created all matter and life.

Again. Maybe both are the answer

**PizzaSHARK!** · 11-04-08, 09:44 PM

Originally Posted by Mudstalker

We have tons of evidence of cave men, dinosaurs, life BEFORE even the dinosaurs. Yet that stuff didn't come from nothing scientists say, they say there was a big bang, caused by a bunch of atoms randomly hitting eachother way out there in space. Just randomly, something that has never happened again and obviously never happened before that. A one time occurence that created all matter and life.

Again. Maybe both are the answer

Assuming this is the only universe. That there aren't many more dimensions to reality/unreality.

etc

**DJ Ms. White** · 11-05-08, 05:05 PM

Originally Posted by Glock

Originally Posted by Mudstalker

We have tons of evidence of cave men, dinosaurs, life BEFORE even the dinosaurs. Yet that stuff didn't come from nothing scientists say, they say there was a big bang, caused by a bunch of atoms randomly hitting eachother way out there in space. Just randomly, something that has never happened again and obviously never happened before that. A one time occurence that created all matter and life.

Again. Maybe both are the answer

Assuming this is the only universe. That there aren't many more dimensions to reality/unreality.

etc

The current theories suggest that essentially what we call our universe is simply the specific convergence of enough dimensions (excluding the spacetime ones, x, y, z, and time; there are 11 dimensions total I think) for our universe to be unique.

**Red_Lizard2** · 11-05-08, 05:18 PM

by the way if you like myths try to find some Sumerian myths, so much fun (i know about them jsut due to the book Snow Crash but man are those myths soooo awesomee

**DJ Ms. White** · 11-05-08, 05:19 PM

Originally Posted by Red_Lizard2

by the way if you like myths try to find some Sumerian myths, so much fun (i know about them jsut due to the book Snow Crash but man are those myths soooo awesomee

Even if you don't, Gilgamesh is one of the greatest tales ever told. It's so epic.

**ZenSaohu** · 11-06-08, 09:03 AM

Any professor worth his salt would be able to turn this kid upside down. The kid doesn't refute most of his arguments, and when he claims "Evil is the absence of God's love," he doesn't actually make any sort of logical claim to this. Who cares if some things can be characterized as the absence of things? This student has not offered any evidence to disprove the professor.

In addition, the professor's later arguments are kind of weak anyway.

Originally Posted by Mudstalker

Again. Maybe both are the answer

Nobody would tolerate overlap way back when science didn't have the evidence it needed to verify evolution, gravity, chemistry, etc. We only allow for science and divinity to "coexist" now because it's convenient, and very characteristic of modern religion.

The Modernists would have you believe that God is un-pinpointable, that no matter how you limit his jurisdiction by establishing more and more laws of the world, he still retreats into a little invincible corner that is a logical loophole. When you're not actively trying to disprove his existence, however, he suddenly comes back out and becomes very involved in our sex lives, work ethic, and diet, among other things.

Realistically, if God were not allowed to have such a double standard, two states could arise: God would be weak, having dominion over whatever science has not yet observed to be the system, or God would be the strong, omnipotent being he was thought to be in the old times while being wholly incompatible with science since The Renaissance.

For those who do not compartmentalize God, science and (most Western) religion cannot overlap peacefully. The only reason a fraction of scientific academia believes in a divine power is due to compartmentalization; many of them would be unable to perform their duties without either not thinking about God, or convincing themselves that God is only an observer. Deism, the philosophy of a passive God who went on vacation after jumpstarting the universe, is more compatible in this sense, and was a big favorite of our founding fathers.

But there is no way an active, omnipotent being would ever find his way into this day and age after we have mastered what was once "his" to control.

I'm going to stop typing now so I can play the L4D demo.