Just to clear things up a bit

[perfecxionX 10+ year member]

DevilDriver:I agree that there's a huge difference, to a point. I don't see science as a far more probable belief but rather just another possibility.

I also agree that the beliefs are oppisites. In religion, a deity is the supreme being, the end results of his finished word and work are considered infallible and worthy of ultimate respect, and belief is based on having faith that it is right.

In science, man is cast in the role and belief is based on having faith that it is right. I put it that way because history shows that scientific theories are accepted for decades at a time until a new genius emerges with a new theory which shoots down the previous belief. I'll cite the race to absolute 0 as an example.

For that line of reasoning I can't see science as a more probable belief since I'd have to resolve myself to accept that I may die believing in something that isn't at all right. The same holds true for religion and that's where I feel that the basis of faith draws the two closer together in practice.

Science is not a belief, science is a tool for shaping beliefs about reality. Science develops theories based on the predicable results of observable phenomenon in controlled experiments. Religion (at least the dogmatism in religion) for the most part is just a shot in the dark that often invokes the supernatural (unpredictable sometimes unobservable). So you could think of "science as a candle in that dark" (Sagan:veryhapp Faith, almost by definition, is belief in the absence of evidence. Where we have evidence for what we believe we have no need for faith. Science is a rigorous tool for compiling the evidence necessary for a more reliable view of reality.

If by "race to absolute 0" you mean the science that propped up theories about racial superiority, that was not science. That was dogmatism being supported by pseudoscience.

 

[mugen08 10+ year member]

At least I didn't say it this time. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

Almost anyone can be educated and become intelligent.

Wisdom, on the other hand, is not so common.

"The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom".

Truer words have never been spoken.

If you think that the Christians burning heretics and adulterers alive for 500 hundred years had not read the new testament you are sorely mistaken. In fact, I would guess that they probably read it much closer than you. As long as we regard these religious texts as something .... omniscient... or something really special, any lunatic can find some interpretation (likely a reasonable interpretation) to justify violence. You say that Christ did not condone murder but in Matthew 5:17 you can see Jesus saying
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."

As a species if we really want to see a future where Muslims believing in martyrdom and Christians believing in the rapture will make good neighbors, then we will need to eliminate these divisive self identifications entirely and learn to regard these books as no different from any other book. A good work of historical fiction maybe, but certainly not the word of God.

You already failed with your first sentence.

How hard is it to understand these men were not practicing Christianity when they commited those murders.

But I do agree that they were lunatics who justified their violence with some misinterpretation of the Bible.

 

[Banana Balls 5,000+ posts]

What is with this religious propoganda bullshit?

 

[Vermithrax 10+ year member]

Science is not a belief, science is a tool for shaping beliefs about reality. Science develops theories based on the predicable results of observable phenomenon in controlled experiments. Religion (at least the dogmatism in religion) for the most part is just a shot in the dark that often invokes the supernatural (unpredictable sometimes unobservable). So you could think of "science as a candle in that dark" (Sagan:veryhapp Faith, almost by definition, is belief in the absence of evidence. Where we have evidence for what we believe we have no need for faith. Science is a rigorous tool for compiling the evidence necessary for a more reliable view of reality.
If by "race to absolute 0" you mean the science that propped up theories about racial superiority, that was not science. That was dogmatism being supported by pseudoscience.

From Merriam-Webster:

be·lief

Pronunciation: \bə-ˈlēf\

Function: noun

Etymology: Middle English beleave, probably alteration of Old English gelēafa, from ge-, associative prefix + lēafa; akin to Old English lȳfan — more at believe

Date: 12th century

1: a state or habit of mind in which trust or confidence is placed in some person or thing

2: something believed ; especially : a tenet or body of tenets held by a group

3: conviction of the truth of some statement or the reality of some being or phenomenon especially when based on examination of evidence

synonyms belief , faith , credence , credit mean assent to the truth of something offered for acceptance. belief may or may not imply certitude in the believer . faith almost always implies certitude even where there is no evidence or proof . credence suggests intellectual assent without implying anything about grounds for assent . credit may imply assent on grounds other than direct proof .

I do believe science can fall under this blanket. I can see where you're coming from, so long as the view is reserved to science being the only tool capable of attaining enlightenment. I don't believe that is the case.

Science has at times produced very dark results. After all, science is a tool of man's creation and is therefore subject to man's limitations.

The race to absolute 0 I mentioned referred to the quest of many famous scientists through history to reach the temperature at which all parts of a system are at the lowest energy permitted by the laws of quantum mechanics ; zero on the Kelvin scale.

 

[Vermithrax 10+ year member]

What is with this religious propoganda bullshit?

Well, there's some discussion of science also. I guess that's what's with it.

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

Do you think everything is equally believable?

 

[Grinder1989 5,000+ posts]

Religion

R
/thread

 

[Vermithrax 10+ year member]

I do, as well as equally unbelievable. I believe belief is a choice, not an absolute.

 

[Vermithrax 10+ year member]

Religion
R
/thread

Do you mean the same common sense it takes for a person to take the time to read what he claims he doesn't care to read and post a response which contradicts his intended meaning?

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

Do you think everything in life is equally plausible?

 

[Grinder1989 5,000+ posts]

Do you mean the same common sense it takes for a person to take the time to read what he claims he doesn't care read and post a response which contradicts his intended meaning?

What did I contradict? My meaning is religion is stupid, the people that believe in it are brainwashed and they can't think for themselves. What every single religious person has in common is that they always look to someone else for answers in understand their religion, way of life and meaning of life. Ask your pastor or priest or whatever about what you should do with your life. God has a plan for everyone......yea right.

 

[Vermithrax 10+ year member]

Do you think everything in life is equally plausible?

Only on a superficial level.

 

[Vermithrax 10+ year member]

Religion
R
/thread

If no one cares to read this thread, then you're included. It insinuates that those who would read this thread lack common sense. You're reading this thread, therefore you lack common sense. You lack common sense, yet you're attempting to explain where religion relates to common sense. I was just following your line of logic.

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

For the intelligent mind, belief is rooted in plausibility. If everything in life is not equally plausible, then an intelligent person will not find everything in life to be equally believable.

Of course anything can be believed, but not everything is equally believable. Science, simply put, is more plausible (and thus more believable) than religion.

Keep in mind also that the argument of god is especially different from religion.

 

[Rashaddd 5,000+ posts]