The Faith & Religion mega Thread

@Arcane
It was never a goal for scientists to prove Evolution or to disprove God. It has only been, as a system, to discover the truth and not just accept some ancient text translated through several dead languages. Evolution is a fact. Deal with it as you will but deny it at your own peril, that peril being how others will view the integrity of your value system, informed or ignorant....discriminating or stubborn.

NOTHING proves (OR EVER WILL) "gods" exist (except maybe WAR!) We come-from\are aliens one way or another. Whether or not they physically planted a seed to evolve or the seed found its own way? Unimaginable tracts of space and time...

Originally Posted by enorbet <sigh> OK one more time Evolution is a fact - Anyone who doubts this has only to look at dogs and virtually ALL of the food we eat. All have been selectively bred to get an improved outcome, a new Family and in some cases, those with longer time frames and therefore opportunity for permutations, new species. Dogs are not wolves anymore. They are a different species even though their more recent ancestors were wolves. This has come about mostly because of Planned Selection, by humans. When the neighbor's boxer ties with your poodle and the progeny are mixed, that's Natural Selection. If you'd actually like more specifics I'd suggest the 2nd episode of the "Cosmos" reboot on your TV or at various websites like Hulu. Incidentally since some animals like fruit flies have short lifespans and lots of offspring, it is possible to directly observe both Planned and Natural Evolution. Again, in Science the word Theory does NOT equal imagination or story-telling. Science is not Religion Even though as Carl Sagan put it, Science and Religion often seek answers to the same Big Questions, there is a basic difference. Religion is self-contained and relatively slow to change because it comes down to us from some "authority" who essentially says, "This is Truth. This is how it is and if you disagree you are a heretic". Religious people tend to take criticism personally because it is a personal belief system and is not a system that allows for updates, being most often based on some ancient text, unassailable. Science is not a body of knowledge, although that is included in it. It IS a PROCESS! It is the application of Reason to observation and peer review that never stops, always testing, with extremely rigorous Rules of Evidence, and either accepting or rejecting new observations and results into the mix. Although it is the nature of people to wish to be correct, and certainly some scientists have held on to cherished conclusions despite new and contradicting evidence and taken disagreement as a personal injury, this is because they failed to live up to the scientific process which contends that it is better to have been mistaken and correct that mistake, than it is to pretend and continue to be mistaken to somehow protect ephemeral feelings of pride. That's just people and our limitations, but as a whole the entire system, the process, which involves many people devoted to falsifying and self-correction, the whole will triumph in discovering what is real and what is not. Since modern Jurisprudence is based on that same process, you might ask yourself whether you would prefer to face a Religious Court or a Civil Court. Which is likely to be more fair and accurate?

Edit\add: here's another good reason why religion is bad, "should we allow abortion," (for the most part) yes. P.s the nazis were religious...

Originally Posted by enorbet @Arcane It was never a goal for scientists to prove Evolution or to disprove God. It has only been, as a system, to discover the truth and not just accept some ancient text translated through several dead languages. Evolution is a fact. Deal with it as you will but deny it at your own peril, that peril being how others will view the integrity of your value system, informed or ignorant....discriminating or stubborn.

"To discover 'The Truth™.'" Ahh, that's always the objective, isn't it? "The Truth." "The Truth." "The Truth!!"

Yes, Evolution is a known and easily provable fact. But, how far it actually goes is conjecture. We simply do not "Know." And therefore, I happen to find the philosophical positions in those "ancient texts" and "dead languages" ... not limited to any one of them ... to be quite useful. They were, after all, written by living, breathing people much like ourselves. And then, they were faithfully preserved through hundreds and thousands of years by people who did – and still do - consider them to be something worth preserving. I don't call such people "ignorant."

As we learn more about the underlying technology (so to speak ...) of genetics, we find a tremendous amount of shared and duplicated DNA. As we observe the in utero development of many animals, we observe very-unsettling things: human embryos produce, then absorb, both gills and tails. We don't know why. We also don't know why we observe "evolution" within a "species," but every animal we've ever observed only reproduces living copies of its own kind. We simply, literally, don't know these things. Yet.

So ... I think that we should embrace all sources of knowledge, and if people want to embrace religious beliefs – or not – either alternative is okay. I simply think that we should instinctively stop well short of "I know." Simply because: we don't. We don't know much at all about Evolution. We don't know much at all about Deities, if/as they exist. We do have instincts. Intuitions. Feelings. We hear still, small voices in the night. And, if we can simply stop using that damnable word, "Know" – and, if we can stop damning each other – we can embrace those things simultaneously, as generations of humans before us have done.

Originally Posted by sundialsvcs {...}Yes, Evolution is a known and easily provable fact. {...} And, if we can simply stop using that damnable word, "Know" – and, if we can stop damning each other – we can embrace those things simultaneously, as generations of humans before us have done.

Wrong. Evolution is still written as "Evolution theory" everywhere in science materials and there is not yet been presented missing stuff to make it fact!

Bingo on this one! Who cares what you believe in if you are good person. I think if you will watch this pet rescue video you won't care much who the rescuers are - atheists, et people or religious fanatics because belief doesn't matter when you use it to make world better place for everyone.

Originally Posted by sundialsvcs ... We simply do not "Know." ...

We can safely assume or

Originally Posted by sundialsvcs "To discover 'The Truth™.'" Ahh, that's always the objective, isn't it? "The Truth." "The Truth." "The Truth!!" ...

and ©®$ plus if a puzzle piece is missing it's still an f-ing puzzle (bad example I know!) http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...%20roundabout/

Originally Posted by jamison20000e We can safely assume or ...

And we can wonder, too. We can listen to those voices when we hear them, now and then.

I simply don't believe that we will ever find "the Truth" in 'a book.' (No, not even that one.) And I just-as-strongly believe that we should never stop trying. We should push the bounds of science. We should push the bounds of philosophy. We should also push the bounds of religion. We should embrace all three, not considering any one to be at the expense of any other.

And, when it comes to "getting into other people's faces about it," I think that this is where people really get extremely wrong. They body-slam other folks and insist that either Jesus or the Ghost of Carl Sagan commanded them to do it. "It just ain't that way, folks." It's much better to be wrong in the right way, than to be right in the wrong way.

This part here to me means "apocalypses, hell" and destruction not thought:

Originally Posted by sundialsvcs ... push the bounds of religion ...

. . .

Originally Posted by Arcane Wrong. Evolution is still written as "Evolution theory" everywhere in science materials and there is not yet been presented missing stuff to make it fact! Bingo on this one! Who cares what you believe in if you are good person. I think if you will watch this pet rescue video you won't care much who the rescuers are - atheists, et people or religious fanatics because belief doesn't matter when you use it to make world better place for everyone.

Over and over people have tried to explain to you the difference between the Scientific definition of theory and the one in common use, as you try to apply it. This clearly demonstrates that your mind is made up already before and despite any evidence. Evolution is as much a fact as the concept that you won't suddenly drift off into the sky or the Sun won't suddenly stop in the sky.

There is no "missing stuff" despite the fact that denyers continue to try to suppose so. A few years ago such denyers used the complexity of the human eye as an example of being impossible through Natural Selection. The steps to how that can occur have been shown with example and still some persist to close their ears, eyes and mind to evidence.

This crap reminds me of when children cover their ears and 'LA! LA! LA!" really loud or shout "I CAN'T HEAR YOU! I CAN'T HEAR YOU". This is not only ignorant and stubborn, but actively self limiting.

Check any scientific publication or 99% of anyone with any manner of science oriented degree (meaning they have actually studied this) and they all agree. Evolution, in layman's terms or otherwise, is a FACT! Get over it. Move on.

Originally Posted by sundialsvcs Yes, Evolution is a known and easily provable fact. But, how far it actually goes is conjecture. We simply do not "Know." And therefore, I happen to find the philosophical positions in those "ancient texts" and "dead languages" ... not limited to any one of them ... to be quite useful. They were, after all, written by living, breathing people much like ourselves. And then, they were faithfully preserved through hundreds and thousands of years by people who did – and still do - consider them to be something worth preserving. I don't call such people "ignorant."

Things are not good or valuable just because they are new or old. So, yes, there are ancient texts worth preserving, some for an understanding of our roots and some for entertainment value, but many for us to shake our heads and wonder what was in their water. Example - It is just staggering to comprehend that what was simple mathematics by modern standards, creatively applied by intelligent men, managed to accurately describe the circumference of our planet and it's distance from our Sun. OTOH many so-called Australian Aborigines persist in believing that they sprung out of the ground, fully formed, despite all the evidence of a far more magnificent past and connection to all humans. Not only DNA, but the history of language and the fossil record shows that their ancestors were incredibly bold and brave explorers who were undaunted by 100+ miles of ocean when all they had were stone tools and the ability to build crude rafts or dugouts.

Finally, ignorant is not the same as obstinate or stupid. Even the very brightest and studied ancient person, you pick the time, is ignorant compared to most college graduates by definition (one could conceivably include most modern children who grow up in a technology rich present). The ancients couldn't possibly know these fundamental things because they hadn't been discovered and analyzed yet. We are all ignorant of many things which is why it is so important to be systematic in what we accept as Truth.

Originally Posted by sundialsvcs As we learn more about the underlying technology (so to speak ...) of genetics, we find a tremendous amount of shared and duplicated DNA. As we observe the in utero development of many animals, we observe very-unsettling things: human embryos produce, then absorb, both gills and tails. We don't know why. We also don't know why we observe "evolution" within a "species," but every animal we've ever observed only reproduces living copies of its own kind. We simply, literally, don't know these things. Yet.

I'd like to suggest great caution in this area as it seems like you are denying the observation of the fossil record and opening the door for the whole Macro/Micro Evolution abomination. There is no such thing as Macro Evolution vs/ Micro Evolution other than the fanciful (or malicious) attempts by stubborn Creationists performing the fancy-dancer fighting retreat. You want Truth? It is a Truth that Darwin was correct. Through various methods, natural and planned, new species are created through DNA. Just as 1 + 1 = 2 can lead to much more complex mathematics, that a single fruit fly or a banana can be altered and then combined and recombined with others until the majority of a population
are a new species by definition. Look it up. A banana growing in some remote jungle, or wild asparagus is not the same species as the ones in your pantry, though that's where they came from. The vast majority of food we eat is that way. Origin of Species means exactly that.

Originally Posted by sundialsvcs So ... I think that we should embrace all sources of knowledge, and if people want to embrace religious beliefs – or not – either alternative is okay. I simply think that we should instinctively stop well short of "I know." Simply because: we don't. We don't know much at all about Evolution. We don't know much at all about Deities, if/as they exist. We do have instincts. Intuitions. Feelings. We hear still, small voices in the night. And, if we can simply stop using that damnable word, "Know" – and, if we can stop damning each other – we can embrace those things simultaneously, as generations of humans before us have done.

The process of learning doesn't mean just accepting everything. It is also reductive, rejecting the invalid. Astrology comes to mind as something that should have been dropped long before werewolves, vampires and demonic possession. Please notice that Science has not demanded the eradication of such "tomes of knowledge" <sarc> whereas vast quantities of Art and Discovery have been destroyed and are still being destroyed, lost forever, by evangelical religious zealots. This is an actual crime against humanity in my book, so while I agree anyone can believe as they like, unfortunately many if not most religions have that evangelical aspect that so easily goes destructive. That's NOT OK.

Originally Posted by sundialsvcs "to push the bounds of religion"

Oh, my. If you seriously thought that by this I somehow meant "apocalypses and destruction," then ... oh, my!

Of course I did not mean any such thing. I merely intended that we should embrace "religion, all religions, religious thought," as being an(other) entirely legitimate portion of our collective human heritage.

We should, I think, absolutely be driven to seek to "know," as of course we are. And, to those ends, I think that we should take the "three-pronged approach" that mankind has also always done: science, philosophy, religion. We should embrace all three, and not judge any against the other. Furthermore, we certainly should feel free to choose whatever (usually, very private ...) personal mixture that we see fit, and to change that mixture as we see fit over time, all the time never body-slamming one another.

This three-pronged approach, by the way, is very powerful indeed. Consider this view:

• Science is, by design, the ultimate conservative ... seeking experimental evidence whenever possible, and "hard evidence" only grudgingly.
• Philosophy is, "thinking about thinking." This pursuit is considering, in a careful way, what cannot be known ... and it is also examining the process by which we 'know' anything-at-all.
• Religion is either a craven attempt at crowd-control (which I shall herewith dismiss ...) or it is absolutely our most vulnerable and private human thing, where we try to find "our place in this world" and our conception of how "this world" got here in the first place.

It's precisely when one of us says, "I am right!" (And especially, "[Therefore,] You are wrong!!" And, oh my, "[Therefore,] You are going to Hell!!!" (Or: Heaven) that we start getting ourselves into ... very, very human ... trouble. That's when we start to do serious offense, and maybe serious damage, to one another.

and blindly. A word only attached to science (for the most part) in ways like, "lets try to fix blindness."

Perhaps cannibalism exists by simply allowing the slaughter of animals for meat; this day and age you can't have the good without the bad sure in science (or anything) however one tries for evolution... anything is conceivable (ê: neo-nazism, ghosts, voodoo, &c,,,) but therefor believable or being a good idea to make it so? No.

None should take offense enough to kill or injure but they do!!! the truth hurts unlike hell!

I edit my posts ✌

Circumcision...

anyone? How about no choice, unlike growing smart enough to see past bull sh! Ha-ha!

Another fitting quote:

"A child is happy because he is unaware"

Maybe there is a reason behind cluelessness?

There are those who seek knowledge for the sake of knowledge; that is Curiosity. There are those who seek knowledge to be known by others; that is Vanity. There are those who seek knowledge in order to serve; that is Love.

love is blind

The "reason" is in front of cluelessness it's r/evolution.
http://www.maritzmotivation.com/blog...y-really-want/

I still find it hard to believe I will burn in a Lake of Fire if I don't hit the Paypal button and donate at whatever religious denomination site.

http://www.churchbuzz.org/church-web...s#.UzxfIJbNtRQ