quote:That is correct. I would ask for someone to provide one example of this knowledge which is apart from science. This is what I have been asking all along, talk to me about why you believe what you do. What is there that you think exists outside of science, that can be "true"?
Your first stament is kind of confusing me, are you asking for something that people believe that is "outside of science" or something that matters that exists "outside of science"? Sorry.
As for faith in God, it does exist copmletely independ from science, or at least mine doesn't. I can sympathize with you here because I do know people who believe because they were told to, or other rather silly reasons and it's always difficult to deal with. Most people here do not belief because someone told them to though, most people here have very good reasons for belief (some of which I'm sure they aren't comfortable sharing). The way I came to belief was through scientific method. Starting with a hypothesis and then testing it. Repeatability was also key, as well as outside influences. I can tell you right now, I acknowledge the possibility that I am wrong, but I feel comfortable enough in the truth of my opinion to act on what it as if it were fact. Because really (as has been pointed out) there is no fact, or at least no facts can be proved completely without some starting assumptions (like what we witness is true).
posted
Robespierre, what you probably aren’t recognizing, (because you’re fairly new here, but we won’t hold that against you ) is that most of the folks on this forum aren’t interested in debating whether or not science can prove or disprove the existence of God. That’s a tedious discussion, and we’ve all had it before.
There’s also more than one of us who get irritated by people who think that anyone who practices a religion must not be familiar with the scientific method or must automatically be hostile toward science. That might not be what you believe, but it is definitely the image you’re projecting.
There isn’t anyone on Hatrack, as far as I know, who takes the six-day creation account in Genesis literally. We have dozens of different ways of looking at scripture represented, and if you’d like to start a thread about that I’m sure it would get a lot of action.
You see, we have many different flavors of religious belief represented here, and sometimes we like to discuss and compare the details. That’s part of what this thread was about. And we can’t discuss the details of our respective faiths if people keep barging in and demanding we prove we’re not loony for having faith in the first place.
I hope you’ll hang around and participate in the discussion. But watch for the subtleties, okay?
I could show you the original copies of the papers written by him,
How can you prove he wrote them?
corrolate those with examples of his handwritting,
How do we know that’s his handwriting?
show you motion pictures of him,
Again, how do we know those movies are of him?
have you interview those who worked with him, etc.
Ahh, so eyewitness account is an acceptable form of proof? Excellent.
But in the end, it all comes down to observable data. Of which the bible has none. The original point here was me questioning the holy texts and asking for evidence of their truths.
Well, the Catholic church at least has a continuum of leaders (the popes) that go all the way back to the time of Christ, one after the other with no breaks or gaps in the historical record. St. Peter, the first pope, was a witness to Christ’s miracles and to the events of the gospels and Acts. There are non-biblical accounts of some of the events in the New Testament dating back to the time of Christ.
Each pope in turn has upheld the legitimacy of the scriptures. OK, it goes back 2000 years, so the provenance is not as easily established as a movie of Albert Einstein. But there are eyewitness accounts believed by more people throughout history than have ever heard of Albert Einstein.
quote: It would seem the the goal of those of you disagreeing with me has been to attack me on a semantic level, without addressing the substance of what I am saying.
HA haha ha haa haaaaah....
hahahahaha . . . . ha ha . . haaaaa.... . . . . . Welcome to Hatrack.
Anyway Rob, saying that you have physical proof that Einstein existed is fine, but how do you know that you're not a vegetable, and everything in your mind is just something you thought up while lying in the bed? It's a far cry, but the point is that belief in the exactness of science requires quite a bit of "faith" as well. I think that's the point Dag is trying to make.
posted
Mmkay. I've followed this thread but barely.
On my college's forum, someone got started talking about prayer as well. And someone posted this article by Marion Zimmer Bradley (author, now deceased). Briefly, it discusses why some prayers might not be answered, and what answers to prayers might not be utilized.
quote: most of the folks on this forum aren’t interested in debating whether or not science can prove or disprove the existence of God.
This is an easy way for me to step out of this conversation. Not because I don't want to answer each and every post which challenges me, but because I have not the time to keep up with you guys. Take this as a white flag, or whatever you like. I don't want to argue with you if I am being a troll.
Posts: 859 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Robespierre, I didn’t call you a troll, and I certainly didn’t mean to chase you off. I hope you’ll reconsider.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
"This is kind of funny. Everyone around me knows what a pessimist I am. I don't think I'm EVER optimistic about anything EXCEPT God."
Perhaps it is because you are naturally a pessimist that you're unable to be optimistic about anything but an idealized higher power?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
I realize this. I just didn't want to be that guy who couldn't let the issue drop. I understand that the god Vs science thing must have been discussed like umpteen million times by now on this forum. I still want to discuss it of course. Plus, on the weekends I don't have much time to keep up with everything.
Another thought on this subject. I would assume that not everyone on this board believes in God. That would be highly unusual for the inter-web. I was wondering at first, "where is the backup?" I had two thoughts on why there were no other 'rackers posting on my side of the issue. One: They stopped reading this thread after page one, as they didn't want to discuss the ins and outs of canon law. Two: They have already been through these discussions and were sick of them.
So anyways, if anyone wants to keep going on this topic, I have no problem with it, but it will have to wait 'till tomorrow.
Posts: 859 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
Three: There have been at least 5 atheists/agnostics/other non-religious folk participating in this thread in the last 3 days but they a) don’t think this is a simple two sided theist vs. atheist debate and thus don’t feel the need to join your “team,” b) don’t agree with your specific points, and/or c) know that the arguments you’re using don’t apply to most of the theists on this board.
or
Four: They were posting, and you mistook them for creationists. (Hi Caleb )
But I should know better than to speculate on other people’s motives for posting/not posting. I’m glad you decided to continue. Might you be interested in a somewhat more nuanced discussion of the relationship between religion and science? There are a lot of people who don’t consider it a simple “vs.” issue.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know I didn't post for ALL of the above reasons. I figured that if Robespierre wanted to poke people with sticks, he could do it on his own. *grin*
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
) is that most of the folks on this forum aren’t interested in debating whether or not science can prove or disprove the existence of God. That’s a tedious discussion, and we’ve all had it before. ![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Wave]](graemlins/wave.gif)
)![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
