107 replies to this topic

[Luna]

Prove that there are square circles O_o and not a circle in or on a square or whatever..
In truth there is no evidence for god. There are only people who claim there is one. Books made by people.. but nothing else. Yet those people usually don't believe in any other god which was believed to be even long before their choice.

Everyone counts greek mythology as stories, but there is a lot of "evidence" that could make people believe in it People built temples and worshiped them, why are they gone and others aren't? Crusade, obviously.

Ancient Egypt, Babylon.. long before judaism and christianity. Why are they just "stories"?... One day, unless your God will prove to be real by interfering in a way it is well known who it is, will too become just a story..

In reality, the only "evidence" for God is verbal and emotional "evidence", that isn't exactly an evidence.. You can say that God seems to exists by that people choose for God to exist.. but that's just an illusion (or delusion), there is no actual interference (not that you can actually point out and said "Here, God did this", only ones which you can blindly attribute to God because you want it to be). Once there are no believers (or really few) God's existence will probably (unless like I said up) disappear. If God did an action which could be unquestionably told that God is the cause, then everyone would believe. It isn't hard for God to get what he/she/it/whatever wants.

This is why I said: "I can't argue with you and you can't argue with me". You don't look for logical evidence, you look to believe and ensure your belief with logic that isn't truly there. It is all logical to a believer but for someone who lacks it there are clearly other explanations.

The job is not the disprove a claim, it is to prove a claim. As it was said before, you usually can't disprove (almost) anything. But why bother if there was no proof in the first place anyways? Until there is a proof, there is no reason to believe.

If God exists, it's probably for our best.. But it won't happen JUST because I want it to be, too bad.

[shadowhawk]

LUNA
Prove that there are square circles O_o and not a circle in or on a square or whatever..
In truth there is no evidence for god. There are only people who claim there is one. Books made by people.. but nothing else. Yet those people usually don't believe in any other god which was believed to be even long before their choice.
SHADOWHAWK
My point exactly. I was responding to the paradox of God making a rock he can’t lift. It is as nonsense as the paradoxes I presented. There are no square circles and red does not have a smell! That does not prove red circles do not exist anymore than the rock paradox proves God does not exist.
LUNA
Everyone counts greek mythology as stories, but there is a lot of "evidence" that could make people believe in it People built temples and worshiped them, why are they gone and others aren't? Crusade, obviously.
SHADOWHALK
The Crusades had nothing to do with Greek or Roman mythology. Islam invading Israel is the reason for all the Crusades. They may still do it. There are some sad events which took place during the Crusades but there were also some good reasons. I think the reason they, the greek gods, are almost gone is because the Gods behaved worse than a soap opera.
LUNA
Ancient Egypt, Babylon.. long before judaism and christianity. Why are they just "stories"?... One day, unless your God will prove to be real by interfering in a way it is well known who it is, will too become just a story..
SHADOWHAWK
Well I don’t think either Judaism or Christianity are in danger of that. Christianity is far bigger than any country or continent in the world. Judaism has gone through hell many times over and still exists alive and healthy. We are living in the fastest expansion of Christianity in history.
LUNA
In reality, the only "evidence" for God is verbal and emotional "evidence", that isn't exactly an evidence.. You can say that God seems to exists by that people choose for God to exist.. but that's just an illusion (or delusion), there is no actual interference (not that you can actually point out and said "Here, God did this", only ones which you can blindly attribute to God because you want it to be). Once there are no believers (or really few) God's existence will probably (unless like I said up) disappear. If God did an action which could be unquestionably told that God is the cause, then everyone would believe. It isn't hard for God to get what he/she/it/whatever wants.
SHADOWHAWK
I think verbal and emotional are but two of many kinds of evidence. Can you imagine no one saying they believe in God or no one being emotionally involved with God? I don’t make God any more than I make you. The only evidence I have that you exist is verbal and emotional. Here are both Jewish and Christian sources for the existence of God with many more arguments beside these two. As a Christian I have many specific to Christianity.

http://www.reasonabl...Article&id=6647
http://www.peterkree...s-existence.htm
http://www.existence...-god-exist.html
http://www.philosoph...ous-experience/
http://www.amazon.co...7JXEKMJ2WRQK82C
LUNA
This is why I said: "I can't argue with you and you can't argue with me". You don't look for logical evidence, you look to believe and ensure your belief with logic that isn't truly there. It is all logical to a believer but for someone who lacks it there are clearly other explanations.
SHADOWHAWK
I look for logical evidence. I can be proven wrong. I do believe but is not without my mind. We can argue but why?
LUNA
The job is not the disprove a claim, it is to prove a claim. As it was said before, you usually can't disprove (almost) anything. But why bother if there was no proof in the first place anyways? Until there is a proof, there is no reason to believe.
SHADOWHAWK
I agree with you. Unless there is evidence there is no reason to believe.
LUNA
If God exists, it's probably for our best.. But it won't happen JUST because I want it to be, too bad.
SHADOWHAWK
I also agree with you here. See how fun it is to argue when you are right?

[Luna]

I am sorry, I am not going to bother reading your links with evidence. I am also not going to try to disprove God (we already said we can't disprove something.. especially one which doesn't have evidence). And I am not going to try to convince you different about the existence of God.

I have one question though:

the greek gods, are almost gone is because the Gods behaved worse than a soap opera.

So you believes in the greek gods too?

Oh, I also have a suggestion: Use Quotation Code! It will make your replies much easier to read.

I am staying with my conclusion from before which is that I can't convince you anyways so it's useless to debate it. I never wanted to convince you anything anyways so that makes it a bit easier

Oh, and the evidence you have for me are quite a bit more than just verbal and emotional.. I am actually observable to you through this forum and I am not hiding or masking my existence. I think even if God or something like it exists it probably doesn't matter because he/she/it/they/whatever probably left and don't care about earth anyways. Just showing presence alone could change the whole planet for the better.. I am not sure about the argument of "Watching and taking people when they die so they can learn themselves" (or something like that) because most people aren't going to learn anyways and when they are in the presence of a very powerful being they will change. So I am not sure if there is such a great difference in coming to the planet and making a difference or making a difference after death.

I imagined the scenario that if I was really powerful and found a planet full with life, what would I do? Well, definitely not make them kill each other in my name or just because some group doesn't believe in me. I thought: "Will I interfere to improve their life?" "Will I just wait and let them evolve until they are ready? - But then a lot will die as it will take a long time probably. - Will I just look after them and prevent their complete death? - But then what will I do with them? It isn't like they will just evolve around me unless I help them and if I do help them why not just help the planet? People will keep 'dying' for a while there anyways.."

Just weird! All those sci-fi show who says "We don't approach a planet until it is evolved enough" are also silly, they are letting people die during all that time. But most of those sci-fi shows don't make much sense anyways..

[Kolos]

I imagined the scenario that if I was really powerful and found a planet full with life, what would I do? Well, definitely not make them kill each other in my name or just because some group doesn't believe in me. I thought: "Will I interfere to improve their life?" "Will I just wait and let them evolve until they are ready? - But then a lot will die as it will take a long time probably. - Will I just look after them and prevent their complete death? - But then what will I do with them? It isn't like they will just evolve around me unless I help them and if I do help them why not just help the planet? People will keep 'dying' for a while there anyways.."

Christians would say that we live on this world to decide if we want to be with God forever or not, but when we think about children, mentally ill and people from other religions that either cant really choose anything or have no idea about Christian God it doeasn't make much sense. Generally Christians have some serious problems with question why our world is like that or even exist?

[DukeNukem]

I am amazed at the immense complexity of our Universe (Multiverse?) and the mind-boggling wonder of life. And the mystery of existence. So, I humbly stand there and say that still, we know that we know nothing. There is so much to discover.

But frankly, my dears, I don`t give a damn what people believe in as long as they work on indefinite life-extension so I - and all of you - can be present when we find out more about said complexity.

Given that polls show that some 40% of all Christians, each and every year, believe that the Second Coming (rapture) is within a year or so, this likely dramatically affects funding that might otherwise go toward radical life extension. After all, these Christian's don't think it's really all that necessary to live hundreds of years longer.

Christianity and radical life extension here on Earth are competing concepts.

[Luna]

If it's always within a year or so, won't they learn? @@...

[chris w]

Christianity and radical life extension here on Earth are competing concepts.

Yeah, to some extent ( meaning that not all Christians are radical Rapturists who are so hasty to meet with their maker ), but what bothers me more than them is that suprisingly small number of atheists seem to be in favor of LE.
It was understandable when there was absolutely no bio-tech in sight that they came to terms with the inevitability of death, but now the tables are slowly turning - and what ? You'll hear many of them saying "why would I want to live longer than 80 years ? What's so special there to do ?"

I find it angrying that atheism seems to correlate too often with this kind of childish, thoughtless nihilism and cynical approach to your own life.

Edited by chris w, 05 July 2010 - 02:59 PM.

[Kolos]

Christianity and radical life extension here on Earth are competing concepts.

Actually with all this pro-life and anti euthanasia rhetoric it would be hard to attack life extension which is naturally not the same with immortality. In a waz we alreadz extended our lives by about 50-70% compearing with more "natural" lifespans and I don't know of any Christian Church that have problems with this or any other religion for the matter. It's true they probably wouldn't like the idea but with time they can even accept it, probably they will have to if they want to survive.
They will definitely oppose transhumanism though.

It was understandable when there was absolutely no bio-tech in sight that they came to terms with the inevitability of death, but now the tables are slowly turning - and what ?

I guess it's still too slow for most people to care.

Also I think that many atheists (rationalists) threat this whole immortality thing like some sort of pseudoscience and they will laugh from it like they laugh from ghosts, telekinesis or reptilians.

[shadowhawk]

Luna
So you believes in the greek gods too?

No, but some of my Pagan friends still do. Quite a few new Agers around.

LUNA
I am staying with my conclusion from before which is that I can't convince you anyways so it's useless to debate it. I never wanted to convince you anything anyways so that makes it a bit easier

OK

LUNA
Oh, and the evidence you have for me are quite a bit more than just verbal and emotional.. I am actually observable to you through this forum and I am not hiding or masking my existence. I think even if God or something like it exists it probably doesn't matter because he/she/it/they/whatever probably left and don't care about earth anyways. Just showing presence alone could change the whole planet for the better.. I am not sure about the argument of "Watching and taking people when they die so they can learn themselves" (or something like that) because most people aren't going to learn anyways and when they are in the presence of a very powerful being they will change. So I am not sure if there is such a great difference in coming to the planet and making a difference or making a difference after death.

OK again I think there is a lot more evidence than verbal and emotional also, for both you and God. I don’t need proof of either unless someone said they were the only ones being rational in denying either.

LUNA
I imagined the scenario that if I was really powerful and found a planet full with life, what would I do? Well, definitely not make them kill each other in my name or just because some group doesn't believe in me. I thought: "Will I interfere to improve their life?" "Will I just wait and let them evolve until they are ready? - But then a lot will die as it will take a long time probably. - Will I just look after them and prevent their complete death? - But then what will I do with them? It isn't like they will just evolve around me unless I help them and if I do help them why not just help the planet? People will keep 'dying' for a while there anyways.."

Good we are all against killing. I don’t want to re-start the “who killed whom” posts found in the subject “Faith?” So far we have found no evidence of advanced life on other planets so you won’t have these problems.

LUNA
Just weird! All those sci-fi show who says "We don't approach a planet until it is evolved enough" are also silly, they are letting people die during all that time. But most of those sci-fi shows don't make much sense anyways.

.

[shadowhawk]

Posted Today, 12:58 PM

View PostDukeNukem, on 04 July 2010 - 11:31 PM, said:
Christianity and radical life extension here on Earth are competing concepts.

Christian's have absolutely no problem with Life Extinction here on earth. All life is a gift from God. Christians would probably have problems with Immortality on earth, without God being involved sense God is Immortal and the source of life. Many of the reasons or objections to earthly immortality are shared with many Atheists.

Actually with all this pro-life and anti euthanasia rhetoric it would be hard to attack life extension which is naturally not the same with immortality. In a waz we alreadz extended our lives by about 50-70% compearing with more "natural" lifespans and I don't know of any Christian Church that have problems with this or any other religion for the matter. It's true they probably wouldn't like the idea but with time they can even accept it, probably they will have to if they want to survive.
They will definitely oppose transhumanism though.

View Postchris w, on 05 July 2010 - 03:54 PM, said:
It was understandable when there was absolutely no bio-tech in sight that they came to terms with the inevitability of death, but now the tables are slowly turning - and what ?

I

KOLOS
guess it's still too slow for most people to care.

Also I think that many atheists (rationalists) threat this whole immortality thing like some sort of pseudoscience and they will laugh from it like they laugh from ghosts, telekinesis or reptilians.

So do many religious.

Edited by shadowhawk, 05 July 2010 - 09:59 PM.

[Kolos]

Yes, most people regardless of what they believe would say it's nothing more than s-f (or fantasy)but this should change with time. It will be very interesting to watch how religions will react to all this changes, immortality being just one of them. Will they even survive and if so in what form?
In times like that, times of change many new religions might be born: syncretic, New-Age like or perhaps something more original. It would be fascinating to see new Christ or Muhammad although I doubt many of them would be similar to revealed religions like Christianity or Islam.

[shadowhawk]

Yes, most people regardless of what they believe would say it's nothing more than s-f (or fantasy)but this should change with time. It will be very interesting to watch how religions will react to all this changes, immortality being just one of them. Will they even survive and if so in what form?
In times like that, times of change many new religions might be born: syncretic, New-Age like or perhaps something more original. It would be fascinating to see new Christ or Muhammad although I doubt many of them would be similar to revealed religions like Christianity or Islam.

The idea that theism will die out any time soon is wishful thinking Christianity alone is far larger than any country in the world and Christianity is growing faster than it ever has..
file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/ADMINI%7E1/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/moz-screenshot.pngSee size of religions below:
http://www.adherents..._Adherents.html

Science is not foreign to religion and Theists have always been among the forefront. See Wikipedia below.
http://en.wikipedia....kers_in_science

http://www.amazon.co.../ref=pd_sim_b_2
http://www.newadvent...then/13598b.htm

There is much misinformation concerning Science and Theism.

Edited by shadowhawk, 06 July 2010 - 07:31 PM.

[Kolos]

The idea that theism will die out any time soon is wishful thinking Christianity alone is far larger than any country in the world and Christianity is growing faster than it ever has..

I didn't say that theism of any kind will die out, just most religions we know today will either change rather drasticly or face extinction. It might be different in the poorest parts of developing world where religions are indeed growing but it's hard to say for how long.

[shadowhawk]

The idea that theism will die out any time soon is wishful thinking Christianity alone is far larger than any country in the world and Christianity is growing faster than it ever has..

I didn't say that theism of any kind will die out, just most religions we know today will either change rather drasticly or face extinction. It might be different in the poorest parts of developing world where religions are indeed growing but it's hard to say for how long.

Alright.
How about Christians like Francis S. Collins, M.D., Ph.D., helped to discover the genetic misspellings that cause cystic fibrosis, neurofibromatosis, Huntington's disease, and a rare form of premature aging called progeria. A pioneer gene hunter, he led the Human Genome Project from 1993 until 2008. For his revolutionary contributions to genetic research, he was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2007, and the National Medal of Science in 2009. He is a member of the Institute of Medicine and the National Academy of Sciences, and has a longstanding interest in the interface between science and faith. He currently serves as the Director of the National Institutes of Health
Should he change his faith so he can stay relevant and not go extinct?

http://www.readthesp...is-collins.html
http://www.amazon.co...ntt_aut_sim_2_1

[chris w]

Posted Today, 12:58 PM

View PostDukeNukem, on 04 July 2010 - 11:31 PM, said:
Christianity and radical life extension here on Earth are competing concepts.

Christian's have absolutely no problem with Life Extinction here on earth. All life is a gift from God. Christians would probably have problems with Immortality on earth, without God being involved sense God is Immortal and the source of life. Many of the reasons or objections to earthly immortality are shared with many Atheists.

Assuming you meant Extension , I don't think this is accurate. It depends what exactly you mean by "christianity" here. Thinking about Papal Catholicism - believe me, they do / will have a problem with it, right now they just don't realise that there is this perspective of elongating human life somewhere in this century, as they are too busy with covering up pedophile scandals and paying the victims.

Living in one of the strongholds of this creed, I can say they have a problem ( meaning the clergy, from the bottom "soldiers" to the pope himslef ) with just about anything that even remotely interferes with human biology. It's understandable that they'd be against abortion, but they are also against the contraceptive pill, and more over, those folks even have a problem with f...n condoms ! where there isn't even the sacred "egg and sperm union" going on.

If you look back in history, the Catholic Church was against every single thing that is now considered useful in medicine - human sections first, they had to be performed in secret on stolen bodies, later vacciness, then organ transplants, now this whole "debate" about stem cells, they weren't even on board FOR GLASSESS, seriously. So I'm hoping for them to more and more loose their hold on societies that they still happen to have, because if this didn't occur, I doubt LE would be going far, if it happens it will happen despite them and not with their support, is my opinion. And luckily the grab is indeed weakening.

Edited by chris w, 07 July 2010 - 12:53 PM.

[platypus]

The idea that theism will die out any time soon is wishful thinking Christianity alone is far larger than any country in the world and Christianity is growing faster than it ever has..

I didn't say that theism of any kind will die out, just most religions we know today will either change rather drasticly or face extinction. It might be different in the poorest parts of developing world where religions are indeed growing but it's hard to say for how long.

Theism will not die before we alter ourselves, at the moment itäs almost hardwired to our brains. Reason cannot extinquish religions I'm afraid.

[shadowhawk]

Posted Today, 12:58 PM

View PostDukeNukem, on 04 July 2010 - 11:31 PM, said:
Christianity and radical life extension here on Earth are competing concepts.

Christian's have absolutely no problem with Life Extinction here on earth. All life is a gift from God. Christians would probably have problems with Immortality on earth, without God being involved sense God is Immortal and the source of life. Many of the reasons or objections to earthly immortality are shared with many Atheists.

Assuming you meant Extension , I don't think this is accurate. It depends what exactly you mean by "christianity" here. Thinking about Papal Catholicism - believe me, they do / will have a problem with it, right now they just don't realise that there is this perspective of elongating human life somewhere in this century, as they are too busy with covering up pedophile scandals and paying the victims.

Living in one of the strongholds of this creed, I can say they have a problem ( meaning the clergy, from the bottom "soldiers" to the pope himslef ) with just about anything that even remotely interferes with human biology. It's understandable that they'd be against abortion, but they are also against the contraceptive pill, and more over, those folks even have a problem with f...n condoms ! where there isn't even the sacred "egg and sperm union" going on.

If you look back in history, the Catholic Church was against every single thing that is now considered useful in medicine - human sections first, they had to be performed in secret on stolen bodies, later vacciness, then organ transplants, now this whole "debate" about stem cells, they weren't even on board FOR GLASSESS, seriously. So I'm hoping for them to more and more loose their hold on societies that they still happen to have, because if this didn't occur, I doubt LE would be going far, if it happens it will happen despite them and not with their support, is my opinion. And luckily the grab is indeed weakening.

Google “Pedophile Teachers,” or “Teachers who Molest,” for the big molesters. The Catholic Church is larger than the total population of North America. There are sure to be some evil people in it.
See also Wikipedia on who molesters are.
http://en.wikipedia....buse#Pedophilia

“In US schools, according to the United States Department of Education, "nearly 9.6% of students are targets of educator sexual misconduct sometime during their school career." In studies of student sex abuse by male and female educators, male students were reported as targets in ranges from 23% to 44%. In U.S. school settings same-sex (female and male) sexual misconduct against students by educators "ranges from 18-28% of reported cases, depending on the study" “Offenders are more likely to be relatives or acquaintances of their victim than strangers. A 2006–2007 Idaho study of 430 cases found that 82% of juvenile sex offenders were known to the victims (acquaintances 46% or relatives 36%).”

I will let the Catholics speak for themselves.
http://en.wikipedia....ientist-clerics
http://en.wikipedia....suit_scientists
http://en.wikipedia....kers_in_science
http://www.newadvent...then/13598b.htm
http://www.catholic....08/0809fea2.asp


I think your statement against the Roman Catholic Church betrays an outdated and false “Conflict Theory” between religion and science.
http://en.wikipedia....Conflict_thesis

[chris w]

“In US schools, according to the United States Department of Education, "nearly 9.6% of students are targets of educator sexual misconduct sometime during their school career." In studies of student sex abuse by male and female educators, male students were reported as targets in ranges from 23% to 44%. In U.S. school settings same-sex (female and male) sexual misconduct against students by educators "ranges from 18-28% of reported cases, depending on the study" “Offenders are more likely to be relatives or acquaintances of their victim than strangers. A 2006–2007 Idaho study of 430 cases found that 82% of juvenile sex offenders were known to the victims (acquaintances 46% or relatives 36%).”

Yeah, only that typically a molesting teacher won't be moved to another school instead of being exposed and brought to trial, as was happening on regular basis in the Church plus they would be trialed by an independent court and not by for example court run by teachers' labor union, as obviously that would be being a judge in your own case, and again that was happening on regular basis in this sacred institution. On the end note - public educational system doesn't claim to hold the keys to eternal salvation in its hands, so I'd think a bit different standards aplly.

[shadowhawk]

The idea that theism will die out any time soon is wishful thinking Christianity alone is far larger than any country in the world and Christianity is growing faster than it ever has..

I didn't say that theism of any kind will die out, just most religions we know today will either change rather drasticly or face extinction. It might be different in the poorest parts of developing world where religions are indeed growing but it's hard to say for how long.

Theism will not die before we alter ourselves, at the moment itäs almost hardwired to our brains. Reason cannot extinquish religions I'm afraid.

Two words, reasonable faith which are not the same. I believe both are important but faith is most important and the basis for a relationship with God.. Reason is supported by argument and evidence.
Faith is true without being dependent upon the vagaries of argument and evidence for the assurance that ny faith is true; at the same time I know confidently and without embarrassment that my faith is true without falling into relativistic subjectivism.

Reason does not extinguish religion.

[platypus]

Faith is true without being dependent upon the vagaries of argument and evidence for the assurance that ny faith is true; at the same time I know confidently and without embarrassment that my faith is true without falling into relativistic subjectivism.

So feeling certain is enough? I think that's just a mental trick.

[shadowhawk]

Faith is true without being dependent upon the vagaries of argument and evidence for the assurance that ny faith is true; at the same time I know confidently and without embarrassment that my faith is true without falling into relativistic subjectivism.

So feeling certain is enough? I think that's just a mental trick.

I didn't say that. I said two words. Reason and faith. Do you feel certain about anything?

[Kolos]

How about Christians like Francis S. Collins, M.D., Ph.D., helped to discover the genetic misspellings that cause cystic fibrosis, neurofibromatosis, Huntington's disease, and a rare form of premature aging called progeria. A pioneer gene hunter, he led the Human Genome Project from 1993 until 2008. For his revolutionary contributions to genetic research, he was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2007, and the National Medal of Science in 2009. He is a member of the Institute of Medicine and the National Academy of Sciences, and has a longstanding interest in the interface between science and faith. He currently serves as the Director of the National Institutes of Health
Should he change his faith so he can stay relevant and not go extinct?

I know there are many scientists that are also Christians but it's not really about science as a whole but rather some aspects of progress that church would be probably against. For most people however they will be too attractive/useful to resign from using them, solely on religious basis.
Today people don't want to follow rules that they don't understand just because their religious authorities said so. Take masturbation or "unnatural" anticonception as an example- few people care or even know it's considered a sin. At some point it might be even hard to refuse to change into some sort of transhuman because they will be healthier, more effective at work etc. I imagine only fanatics would be determined enough to face alienation and hardships that he could easily avoid. So I don't think religions we know today would complitelly extinc but rather face marginalisation.
That doesn't mean that there wouldn't be any new religions, for new times.

Edited by Kolos, 08 July 2010 - 12:08 AM.

[shadowhawk]

http://en.wikipedia....buse#Pedophilia[/url]

[b]"In US schools, according to the United States Department of Education, "nearly 9.6% of students are targets of educator sexual misconduct sometime during their school career." In studies of student sex abuse by male and female educators, male students were reported as targets in ranges from 23% to 44%. In U.S. school settings same-sex (female and male) sexual misconduct against students by educators "ranges from 18-28% of reported cases, depending on the study" "Offenders are more likely to be relatives or acquaintances of their victim than strangers. A 2006–2007 Idaho study of 430 cases found that 82% of juvenile sex offenders were known to the victims (acquaintances 46% or relatives 36%)."

Yeah, only that typically a molesting teacher won't be moved to another school instead of being exposed and brought to trial, as was happening on regular basis in the Church plus they would be trialed by an independent court and not by for example court run by teachers' labor union, as obviously that would be being a judge in your own case, and again that was happening on regular basis in this sacred institution. On the end note - public educational system doesn't claim to hold the keys to eternal salvation in its hands, so I'd think a bit different standards aplly.

I do not agree with the way the Roman Catholic Church has dealt with molestations either. At the same time I think attacking a whole church on the basis of a few perverts does nothing to solve the problem. In fact it makes it worse, out of balance like a false accusation. Neither the Church nor most priests are the big problem. People from all groups have a percent who are molesters.

The Church strongly teaches against this sin. Check out sex offenders.
http://www.sexoffender.com/state.html
http://en.wikipedia....ki/Sex_offender
http://en.wikipedia....ld_sexual_abuse

“Most sexual abuse offenders are acquainted with their victims; approximately 30% are relatives of the child, most often brothers, fathers, uncles or cousins; around 60% are other acquaintances such as 'friends' of the family, babysitters, or neighbors; strangers are the offenders in approximately 10% of child sexual abuse cases. Most child sexual abuse is committed by men; studies show that women commit 14% to 40% of offenses reported against boys and 6% of offenses reported against girls. Most offenders who sexually abuse prepubescent children are pedophiles although some offenders do not meet the clinical diagnosis standards for pedophilia.”

[shadowhawk]

How about Christians like Francis S. Collins, M.D., Ph.D., helped to discover the genetic misspellings that cause cystic fibrosis, neurofibromatosis, Huntington's disease, and a rare form of premature aging called progeria. A pioneer gene hunter, he led the Human Genome Project from 1993 until 2008. For his revolutionary contributions to genetic research, he was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2007, and the National Medal of Science in 2009. He is a member of the Institute of Medicine and the National Academy of Sciences, and has a longstanding interest in the interface between science and faith. He currently serves as the Director of the National Institutes of Health
Should he change his faith so he can stay relevant and not go extinct?

I know there are many scientists that are also Christians but it's not really about science as a whole but rather some aspects of progress that church would be probably against. For most people however they will be too attractive/useful to resign from using them, solely on religious basis.
Today people don't want to follow rules that they don't understand just because their religious authorities said so. Take masturbation or "unnatural" anticonception as an example- few people care or even know it's considered a sin. At some point it might be even hard to refuse to change into some sort of transhuman because they will be healthier, more effective at work etc. I imagine only fanatics would be determined enough to face alienation and hardships that he could easily avoid. So I don't think religions we know today would complitelly extinc but rather face marginalisation.
That doesn't mean that there wouldn't be any new religions, for new times.

Masturbation has ethical aspects to it. See below. For example you judge it as natural and alright, if I read you right. I agree with you, many do not want to follow rules they do not understand. Can you imagine anything that is sexual that is wrong? Is it up to popular opinion?

http://en.wikipedia....on_masturbation

[N.T.M.]

Science is not foreign to religion and Theists have always been among the forefront. See Wikipedia below.
http://en.wikipedia....kers_in_science

And historically the Earth was considered to be flat.

Also, you neglect to mention that many must assume a superficial position of theism as to avoid being vilified by contemporaries.

Now let’s only concern ourselves with theism today and its relation to science. You’ll obviously see that things have grown out of favor for you.

[platypus]

Faith is true without being dependent upon the vagaries of argument and evidence for the assurance that ny faith is true; at the same time I know confidently and without embarrassment that my faith is true without falling into relativistic subjectivism.

So feeling certain is enough? I think that's just a mental trick.

I didn't say that. I said two words. Reason and faith. Do you feel certain about anything?

One's faith can easily be incorrect. Faith is way overrated, I guess that's the christian influence in our culture.

[N.T.M.]

Faith is true without being dependent upon the vagaries of argument and evidence for the assurance that ny faith is true; at the same time I know confidently and without embarrassment that my faith is true without falling into relativistic subjectivism.

So feeling certain is enough? I think that's just a mental trick.

I didn't say that. I said two words. Reason and faith. Do you feel certain about anything?

One's faith can easily be incorrect. Faith is way overrated, I guess that's the christian influence in our culture.

Faith is just a blind assertion. Otherwise it couldn’t be called faith. That being said, no view should be predicated on faith.

[Kolos]

Masturbation has ethical aspects to it. See below. For example you judge it as natural and alright, if I read you right.
http://en.wikipedia....on_masturbation

I don't care if it's "natural" but yes it's quite alright most of the time but I just gave it as an example of something that is considered wrong by religion but most believers don't really care.

I agree with you, many do not want to follow rules they do not understand. Can you imagine anything that is sexual that is wrong? Is it up to popular opinion?

Well there are some sexual activities that are considered wrong by most people in our times such as rape and it is condemned by popular opinion. I'm not sure what are you trying to say here.

[shadowhawk]

Masturbation has ethical aspects to it. See below. For example you judge it as natural and alright, if I read you right.
http://en.wikipedia....on_masturbation

I don't care if it's "natural" but yes it's quite alright most of the time but I just gave it as an example of something that is considered wrong by religion but most believers don't really care.

I agree with you, many do not want to follow rules they do not understand. Can you imagine anything that is sexual that is wrong? Is it up to popular opinion?

Well there are some sexual activities that are considered wrong by most people in our times such as rape and it is condemned by popular opinion. I'm not sure what are you trying to say here.

My question related to the basis of ethical judgments of any kind. Suppose you were among a group of rapists and popular opinion in this case was rape was not wrong. Would it be right since it was the popular option? Remember in the second world war, the Russian army raped most of the women when they took Germany. The Nazis did the same kind of things to the Jews.
http://en.wikipedia....in_World_War_II

How about abortion or mercy killings. Where do we get our ethics?

[eternaltraveler]

Where do we get our ethics?

This, among many things, is something you like to keep repeating.

Religious people get their ethics from a fixed false belief system shared as popular opinion among their group (or at least they like to give the impression of this).

Rational people muddle along as best we can in an uncertain and changing world.

How about abortion

for an example of an effort in muddling along you can see the recent thread I started on abortion.

http://www.imminst.o...showtopic=41993

Edited by eternaltraveler, 09 July 2010 - 03:23 AM.